johnmarshall4

More requests: It would be nice to be able to delete files from a share. The QR codes are very cool - but I'd like the ability to enter the full secret as well - in case I need to connect to a share while I'm away from my computer, but I happen to have the secret.

Very cool guys! I like the download on demand! I understand this is the first version and needs some work, but here are a few comments from my first looks: The camera backup is cool, but usually with Camera backup features in apps like Dropbox, GDrive and the like it turns on syncing new photos, and gives you the option of syncing all your existing photos - so you don't have to sync all the old ones. (See #2). In camera backup at least it would be good to allow me to choose all the albums to sync. Syncing the Apple Photo Stream is a bit redundant for example. I see that for many file types you bring up the 'open in' dialog which is cool. For photos however you show them directly, but it would be nice to also have the option to bring up the open-in menu somehow (swipe or tap and hold). - Would be very useful to send photos to iPhoto for example, or save to the camera roll. Once a file is downloaded, there is no way to remove it from the local device - to save space again.

Ok, so I tested this with 1.1.12 between a Mac and Windows. It no longer deletes the folder (and containing files). but it also doesn't try to sync the rename at all. So I'm left with differently cased folder names on each side of the share. - Still not right guys.

I disagree, I think the fact that the team is working very hard to make sure it runs on NAS devices makes this feature fit very well with the scope of the project. Having your backup data encrypted is very reasonable. Also using BT Sync with a cheap VPS is an amazingly disruptive private dropbox solution, but useless without file level encryption at the remote end. This is a feature no one else has.

Wow, what an awesome use case! It would be really cool if your devices also supported easy Adhoc Wi-Fi connections such that a student with updated data could sync another student he bumped into without needing a Wi-Fi network.

I would love to test out on iOS.

Thanks. I know you are busy. Keep up the good work.

@BitTorrent - any update on this? I have not heard back from you via tech support. This is 100% reproducible for me and I had to stop syncing my iTunes folder because of it.

@rpod83, I hear you. I'm one of those paranoid people that want as much redundancy as possible. I would also love that feature.

I don't really see Bt Sync going down the 'cached' network drive route like Bitcasa. (My opinion though). I think what we will get is a selective sync solution. At least that is what I've been asking for. That way you can setup a share on your smaller Macbook, and selectively choose only part of the fileset to sync. The granularity would probably be at the folder level like Dropbox. I'm really waiting for this. Who know though, with a public API someone could write a cached drive type solution, that would be cool.

Version 1.0.134 Renaming a folder from 'TEst' to 'Test' for example will cause the files to be deleted on both ends of a sync. In my case the source was Mac. Depending on what is on the other end - including a Windows RO share the empty folder may or may not remain. I found out the hard way that iTunes (Mac at least) can rename folders while playing songs if the tags in a given album don't exactly match in their case. I was syncing my music to a RO share so I thought my library would be safe. Instead I had multiple Albums deleted. - I only noticed because I regularly check the Sync history. - ITunes simply followed the files as they moved to .SyncTrash and continued to play them so it was not obvious something happened. You have been warned.

I second gorpo's wish list. My needs are simple, I want basic functionality available via API for mobile apps. I primarily intend to use BTSync shares as external storage / export for app data.

@zemon - you should make sure to contact tech support with this issue. I had a similar bug where the receiver could not rename the !sync file back to the original name, and after awhile it deleted the original on the source. This might be related. They have fixed it in some test builds, and it would be good to know if it fixes your problem also. (Well the deletion part anyway). If possible I'd follow the steps in this post to recreate the problem and capture more info in the log - then send it off to them.

Intriguing idea. There is a similar top post on btsync based web sites. It will be interesting to see what people do with this over time. Certainly family based sharing is possible right now, though without any kind of nice front-end or a good notification system.

Not at this time. There are several suggestion for 'selective sync', but that will probably be at the sub-folder level and not at the specific file level. You could make a suggestion in the wish list.

original message Sorry but you still can't share a sub folder, even if it is a RO share. Hopefully they will support this soon.

This is not my experience at all. At least not with 1.0.116. D. If I mod a file on a RO machine, that's it, it never gets updated. I can modify the original on the RW and it doesn't overwrite the one on the RO machine. E. If I delete a file on an RO machine, and then make a change to it on the RW machine it doesn't copy the new one back - it stays deleted.

@eseelke, Wow those are some pretty good deals for storage VPS. As for encryption, you could always implement on the client side with encFS or TrueCrypt for now. Or setup an encrypted partition on the VPS - though manually entering the credentials after boot might be a pain.

@kassan, I'd like to hear a bit more about this potential use case. Ignoring the topic of .SyncIgnore for a minute.... For 'distribution' I think the use of a read-only secret might be handy - at least for one way push out to the users. This implies a 'master' source somewhere though. In only bring it up because you mention you don't want to use BTS as a 'sync tool' and RO secret is pretty much the only way to avoid 'sync' currently. Are you also thinking of using BTSync for the users to to contribute files or some other means?

Yes this would be nice. I have also seen a request to allow you to chose which to use - Growl or OSX notifications when both are available. Today it prioritizes Growl over OSX Notifications.

There have been similar requests. You should browse the wish list and either like one or add your own. I also want this very badly.

You should add your request to the wish list.

:| I think you mean Sync doesn't yet use 'compression'.

@ScottNY845 - There is a similar discussion here. I agree this is important to be able to control how access to a share spreads. You should mention this request in the Wishlist.

I've been thinking about this some more, as many people seem to be requesting it. It does feel a bit like it would bloat up and complicate BTSync, but I still like it. I think, though, that the reason it seems to fit here, and not so much with Cubby or AeroFS, is because BTSync runs on NAS devices. That kinda opens the door for the 'shared' space scenario. If they were to implement it, it would need to do all the encrypting on the client side - you don't want your friend/brothers keys ever on your side of the net for security reasons. BTSync would also have to manage encryption keys (client side), couldn't just use the secret obviously. From a user interface point of view, maybe BTSync could generate an encrypted / storage only key similar to how they generate a RO key today.