How to tell "receive only" end to allow resync with "send only" end

I have a “Receive only” folder at the server and a “send only” folder on a client.

If a >touch operation or other modification is performed on all the files on the “receive only” end, they’re now out of sync. As would be expected.

But they’re “newer” than the sending end.

Any way to get them back in sync?

(I’m trying to everything-proof this before I go live with it at my organization)

Wait: I think I’ve found it. Let me see if I’ve got this right.

In the SENDING FOLDER, “Override changes” means the RECEIVE folder’s changes would propagate TO the SEND folder.

In the RECEIVING FOLDER, then “Revert changes” means the SEND folder could then push the changes TO the RECEIVE and overwrite them, as normal.

Do I have this correct, or backwards?

On the sending folder override means tramp anyone elses changes, even if changes on the receive only are not actual changes that are propagated, it just propagates that it does not have the file because it modified it.

You want to revert local changes on the receive only folder.

So if I want “Send” to copy overtop of “Receive” regardless of the sync status of the files in “Receive” I want… revert local on the receive side?

In other words:

“Send” Files ------> “Receive” folder = revert at the receive folder


“Receive” files -----> “Send” Folder = (shouldn’t be doable on s/r only but if they WERE send/receive,) I’d want override, on the sender right?

That SEEMS backwards to me, but as long as I’m sure I know what I’m doing I’m happy. Can you/anyone confirm this for me?

I don’t understand your explanation.

Override changes on send only promotes it’s local view as the global view which is what all devices aim to get to. Remote side can still choose to ignore it (because it’s send only, or it’s receive only with local modifications which would be tramped if it were to follow them).

Revert local changes on receive only reverts any local changes, which are in conflict with the global view, which as a result prevent it from achieving the global view (as you’d lose local modifications).

These two actions are not equivalent.

The changes are on the “receive” side, and conflict with incoming files.

Say I change a file, locally, on the “receive only” side, but I WANT the version of the “send only” side to overwrite it, regardless of date/status, would I choose override or revert?

(Note, versioning is on, so the overwritten version will of course be moved to .stversions regardless

(EDIT: Assume all changes on “receive” side are accidental, if that helps for this example)

You’d choose to revert, as I’ve explained, override just suggests what the state should look like, it does not mean others will accept it, and in this case they won’t, as that would mean data loss of the local changes.

Thanks! That’s how I thought I read that.

I was just making doubly sure.

It seems backwards to me. To someone unfamiliar with the whole thing, “override” seems like it MIGHT mean “override remote file version conflict warnings and push the file.” Which it apparently does not mean. :grin:

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.