donquijote
-
Posts
21 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by donquijote
-
-
I have the exact same problem on a mbwe white light. if anyobdy has any solutions, I am eagerly checking this thread periodically
-
to improve on that, bitTorrent music streaming, that would stream music files to the phone from you other nodes could be a space-saving option, since phones have less available storage than, say, laptops.
-
i'd be using it to sync my music collection, mostly.
Possibly also pictures. But I'd make the pictures one-way: full key on the phone, read-only key on my home repository, and somehow make the home repository never delete anything.
option to sync only over wifi is a must, i don't think that should be a restriction though. It should work over 3g/4g/whatever as well.
like i also said on the main wishlist, wiFi ssid-based bandwidth capping would be great, since the phone is more mobile than the laptop, and not all networks might be suitable/happy/understanding with you bitTorrenting from them.
-
for windows (tested on win7):
sort by columns in "Transfer" tab
move to next field/checkbox in "Preferences" tab by pressing the tab key
additionally, platform-independent:
* transfer speed plot in time would be nice (not required)* uTorrent style scheduling would be even nicer - for optimizing transfers in networks with strong time/related congestion
* Wireless SSID-based transfer capping would be awesome: at work, stay under the radar. at home: go full blast. when i connect to the mobile hotspot, stop completely. -
Anyway, this approach, I think, is too laborious and is not that intuitive as it could be, isn't it?
Thank you for putting it into kinder words than I might have
-
I think you didn't miss the point!
But. By ignoring c:\folder1\sub1 (on Machine1) and d:\share1\sub1 how would they sync on those machines (1 and 2)?
throughut this discussion, i was not advocating ignoring anything. I merely acknowledged one proposed setup.
-
The solution with .SyncIgnore is good until you are not really willing to sync those subfolders on machines 1 and 2. Which is kind of limited solution.
SHOULD be:
The solution with .SyncIgnore is good until you are not really willing to sync those subfolders on machines 1 and 2.
if i grasp the common understanding of the concept i introduced, syncing with machine2 would be REQUIRED to keep machine1 in sync with machine3
-
You won't be able to try it out, since SyncApp doesn't allow to make Secrets for folders within already synced ones.
i did not know that (since i did not try it out yet, and it was not obvious to me, from the techincal info i got so far.)
The solution, as I say, would be to use ".SyncIgnore"
So, setup a sync on the parent folder between your two devices (Machine 1 and 2), but add "sub1" as a filter into the .SyncIgnore files on both these machines.
Then, setup your separate "sub1" sync across your 3 devices
The key thing is filtering "sub1" so that the contents of that folder are ignored by the parent sync, and only processed by the "sub1" sync itself!
That is indeed "A" solution, but the issue of having to have a mental inventory of the subfolder is still there.
if,say, i buy a new machine and want all my giant folder to sync directly, i'd have to remember that some (at least one) subfolders are filtered out, and add them manually on my new machine.
which might be no problem if you have only one such subfolder, or perhaps an UNIMPORTANT subfolder. But neither is a guaranteed given fact.
-
Well yes, from technical point of view. What I tried to show was that the sub1 folder will be synced on all 3 machines, which is what we are asking for
I still can't get what kind of problems this approach will cause.I could immagine that it might cause confussion inside the app, possibly even make it crash.
Or perhaps some issues regarding to which file version is the most recent.
surely, i'd have to try it out. and i WILL try it out.
But i was thinking maybe other people have tried it before.
-
Yes! Except "sub1" won't be created, since it's already there! See pic below:
actually....
-
donquijote, please see this modified image of your scenario showing how you could achieve your sync using .SyncIgnore:
I am sorry if i don't see everything you post, because i am currently composing. I appologize in advance, and assure you that i am trying to understand the entire thread, as a whole, even if we get out-of-sync with posts.
-
In which case, instead of syncing the entire parent folder, and then also setting up separate syncs for sub folders - you would need to create individual syncs on the relevant sub folders - don't also sync the parent folder - as this will cause problems!
OR....
if you really want to sync both the parent folder and sub folders separately, you would need to use .SyncIgnore on the parent folder to EXCLUDE the sub folders you're syncing separately from that parent sync:
oh.
This makes sense to me.
But i'd still have to keep track of what is shared where, exactly.
-
it would be quite unlikely for regular users to be setting up syncs like these (as there's no reason to do so anyway!)
i disagree.
I am a regular user, and i came up with this test idea, because i would like to use it that way. and my idea is a subset of the parallel sync scenario.
say machine1-type instances are my personal computers, and machine3-type instances are: my media streaming server, and a computer in my car. I would like to sync a folder with music.
machine2 type instances would serve as a "bonding agent" precisely to make sure that changes in the machine-3 type shares are reflected to the machine1-type instances, and viceversa.
there is no reason why i would want to have my vacation pictures on my media streaming box. Or in my car.
But if i start doing like you suggested with: musc folders, picture folder, various other category-based folder, like projects, and subprojects shared with various machines/people, the entire system would require careful records as to which share is synced on which machine, and i need to hire my own sysadmin to make sure everything is where i want it to be.
That being said, i am not blind to the complexity of managing this in the SyncApp, software, but i'd rather build that into the software once, than having EACH user do it BY HIMSELF for every particular situation in the world.
-
In which case, instead of syncing the entire parent folder, and then also setting up separate syncs for sub folders - you would need to create individual syncs on the relevant sub folders - don't also sync the parent folder - as this will cause problems!
Which would increase the time needed to invest in micro-managing all those micro-shares.
-
You are syncing "c:\folder1" on machine 1 with "d:\share1" on Machine 2.
"d:\share1" has a sub folder, "sub1" - therefore this will replicate back and a "sub1" folder will be created and then synced on machine 1 at c:\folder1\sub1
oh, i was not trying to imply that shouldn't be so. I just didnt want to load the image with too much data. any folder represented on the picture is intended to mean an entire part of the directory file tree....
If that would work like that, it would be exactly as i would envision it.
Any reasons why this behaviour would be a bad idea?
-
Well, my attachments do appear to be working (tested on 3 different browsers on 2 different computers!)
it seems i can see MY attachments, and you can see YOUR atttachments. Tested on multiple browsers on my own machine, with cleared caches.
-
"sub1" share on Machine 2 would also replicate back to a "folder1/sub1" on Machine 1!! ....so, yes, this will cause you problems!
that would be intended behaviour, as far as i am concerned
in a real world scenario, i would have a giant folder shared across multiple machines, but i would also like to have a subfolder of that (for example a "music" folder) synced to, say, my work laptop.
-
lol. Your attachments dont work for me either.
here is a link to it, on my dropbox
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uqiqiebi25ax2cc/SyncApp%20test1.png
-
I can see it to be attached, at the bottom, under Attached Thumbnails
-
I just got an invite to the alpha, and I am already using it to sync a metric shitload of files.
My impressions are mixed, but this is not wher eI want to write them down.
I am a proffessional software testers, and I instinctively come up with various test Ideas. Because I have limited time to ACTUALLY perform this test in the near future, i thought i could at least write about it here.
My test idea is described in the attached picture. Ask for clarifications, if necessary.
<==== look at the picture now, then continue reading ===>
<LATER EDIT>
</LATER EDIT>
<LATER EDIT2>
image embedding of any kind seems to be broken on this forum. use this dropbox link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uqiqiebi25ax2cc/SyncApp%20test1.png
</LATER EDIT>
there would be a varying number of machines from each of the described three categories.
Windows path notations are used, but the test idea is not limited in terms of OS architecture.
My questions would be the following:
- how would users expect this to work?
- how do the developers expect this to work?
- has anyone tried it yet?
- does it work?
- should it work?
(the nuances of the questions are actually relevant to me, and are not written just for artistic value)
please add any commentary on the subject, other than what i posted.
I still can't get what kind of problems this approach will cause.
Android App not compatible with Galaxy S3, where to get apk?
in Sync General Discussion
Posted
I also have the exact same issue with my galaxy s3.
I wonder how many people have this issue and DON'T know about this forum...
... or how many people just download the apk from that dropbox link, and never report this problem...
...because I cannot post a review for the app in the Android Market, presumably because you can't review something incompatible with your device....
Just pointing out that this might be an issue with a lot of people that would otherwwise love to use this app....