rdiaz02
February 24, 2015, 8:48pm
4
But I think you actually can if you link the two masters (with none as a master) and then add another “folder pair” with one of the masters and the slave. See more here: Three node syncthing with two masters :
But I think there is a relatively simple solution. Suppose you want changes to be synced two-way between A and B, but you want C to accept all changes and not propagate any (so A and B would both be masters, and C would be what other software calls read-only nodes).
Suppose the things you want synced live in directory ~/D1 (at least in machine A).
In A add two folders (I mean, “Folders” in the sense of the user interface of ST, not in the “directory of a filesystem” sense)
both of them use as Folder Path ~/D1, but in A-one-way-C, “Folder master” is checked.
Now, in both B and C accept the creation of the new folder, use ~/D1 (or whatever) in your filesystem, and you are done.
I just tried it, and it works fine. The key idea is that syncthing has no trouble using the same directory in different “Folders”, so you can share it in different ways (as “Master” and as non master).
This is not as simple as checking boxes for “read only”, etc, but it seems to work and is just fine (at least for small numbers of interconnected nodes).
P.S. You might also think about adding, in B, a
B-one-way-C
but this to me is confusing and when playing with it, it can lead to trouble. This makes sense: if you have just
A-one-way-C
A-two-way-B
it is unambiguous how changes can and cannot propagate. If you add B-one-way-C then it ain’t.