increa
February 28, 2018, 1:36pm
39
For newcomers to the thread, realize there appears to be two similar threads. Check them both out for full understanding:
Hi all,
I would like to open up a discussion a new folder type: Receive Only.
Currently only 2 folder types are supported e.g: Send Only, Send & Receive. But these two options do not support the scenario where only fewer node should introduce new changes to the peers. The other nodes/peers should not publish any local changes to the network. This is a typical use case where repositories/files can be synced to multiple peers but writes to these repositories/files are only accepted in a single o…
Is there a reason why there are no “Receive Only” folders?
I’d like my younger child to get at a set of games on her synchronized computer, but I don’t want anything she does to propagate to others. Am I missing something, or can SyncThing not do this?
Or, I want to access my music library but any mods or deletions I do not want propagating into my master music database. Can SyncThing not do this?
Or, I want to set up a one-way data repository drop that only receives updates but does not s…
Also, here is a “proposal on the table” of how to implement the proposal. If users coalesce around this description, it would be easier for developers to make the change.
Jakob, thank you for a specific request I can try to answer. Here is my first attempt to document a rule-set a receive-only folder should implement. I believe delete, modify, and create can all be captured in the concept of “change”, so I did not repeat the same thing three times.
Imagine three peers are in the sync group, each with a different character. All three types don’t need to be present, this only documents what they should do ~if~ they were present.
SR = normal send & receive fold…