The dialog of menu Action > Advanced > Folder > Devices has the entries “[object Object], [object Object], [object Object]” repeatedly. But no device names. Thats true for Debian, OS X and Windows installs of version v0.14.30.
Sharing the folder with another device adds another “[object Object]”. Not saying this is a bug, but if the names of the devices could be listed here it would go a long way helping to find the devices a folder is shared with.
Thus I file this as a feature request. I’d be most grateful if one of the developers could consider adding this.
Why would you go to the advanced options to see the devices, instead of the normal folder info / folder edit dialog?
The advanced settings show the settings as they are. The devices a folder is shared with aren’t just their names, but the device objects, so the advanced settings show [object Object]. Even if we would change the display, you wouldn’t be able to edit the devices there.
The advanced editor doesn’t understand lists of objects. Until quite recently it didn’t understand lists at all and didn’t show this setting. It would be better that it didn’t display it at all now either. But indeed, there is no need to reach into the advanced editor for this one.
I don’t understand the explanations (not being a developer) but thanks anyway. What I do understand is that the bahaviour is by design and rightfully so as there are other options I’m not aware of. Okay. Then consider my request closed. Unfortunately I can’t move the post to support, so it’s stuck in Feature for now. Sorry.
To the question why I went there - well I was trying to find a place where I could quickly see to what devices folder are shared. Unfortunately the device names are longer and two can be seen at the most. Of course clicking on a folder in the GUI, hovering over the entry with the mouse, reading and memorizing that, changing to the next folder, hovering, comparing etc. works as well - but not very comfortable.
And I could click “edit” for each of the folders if I didn’t want to hover, but that makes it even more laborious.
Am I missing the woods for the trees? Or is my request so utterly unreasonable that two of the lead developers care to point out that I shouldn’t go there. What did I miss? And where should I look?