Skip to content

enhancement idea: Global sync-exclude.lst #19385

Closed

Description

@Psy-Virus

Hey folks,

I was thinking about a GitHub-repository like use of Owncloud, in that way, that I share a folder where I update the content from time to time. But some files, a config file for example, should not be synced. And instead of telling every user to update it's clients ignore list, I was thinking about if it will be possible or if you want to implement this feature in the future?

Or maybe that the ignore list is handled via Owncloud instead of the client?

Hope you like the idea..

Thanks in advance

:-)

Activity

  1. oparoz commented on Sep 26, 2015

    @oparoz
    Contributor

    Please test this PR: #19235

  2. mmattel commented on Sep 26, 2015

    @mmattel
    Contributor

    @oparoz I personally would like to seperate PR #19235 from this idea. From the concept point of view this requirement could easily be implemented as a "excluded" directory". But I would recommend to create a new config.php parameter and add the query against in the PR. Then things are more clear, even if we change the underlaying coding.

  3. mmattel commented on Sep 26, 2015

    @mmattel
    Contributor

    hmmm, thinking more about this.
    @Psy-Virus do I get it right that the original share owner should have full view and access while share taker and eventually reshare taker should have restricted view and access? PR #19235 does not distinguish between this, it prevents view and access to everybody.

    We do have already a config.php parameter blacklisted_files' => array('.htaccess') but this has a very special meaning, works share independent and should imho not be used for.

    @oparoz can we distinguish if an access comes from the original share owner versus a share (reshare) taker?

  4. oparoz commented on Sep 26, 2015

    @oparoz
    Contributor

    @oparoz can we distinguish if an access comes from the original share owner versus a share (reshare) taker?

    It's possible to write a test for it (if currentUser === fileOwner), but I have no idea if there is an API method which does the same.

    Reading the OP, I thought the request was about creating a global gitignore. There are files you're using locally and that you never want to sync. Sharees will have similar files in their tree and they will be mixed with files they sync with ownCloud.
    Kind of like the snapshot or thumbnail scenario. You're OK to share everything else, just not the content of those folders.

  5. mmattel commented on Sep 26, 2015

    @mmattel
    Contributor

    oh, sorry got it. I misinterpreted, cancel my comment...

  6. Psy-Virus commented on Sep 27, 2015

    @Psy-Virus
    Author

    Hey @mmattel and @oparoz,

    sorry for the late reply.

    @mmattel

    do I get it right that the original share owner should have full view and access while share taker and eventually reshare taker should have restricted view and access?

    I thought more about something like the .gitignore file. The title is maybe a little bit irritating, sorry.

    Okay, so I'll bring an example:
    Let's say I will share a program, that I also want to maintain and/or update. Your are the client, that will profit from this simple method of updating. the program creates a config.file. This config.file shouldn't be synced, because every client will have it's very own setting in it.

    But to tell everyone to add this and this and this file to the ignore list of it's sync_client is crap. So I thought about a more global handling, but per directory/share.

    The share would be configured that way, that the user will only have read access, so the source files can't be changed by them.
    A 'simple' checkbox named "ignored files" or something in this direction would be a cool addition to the share dialog.

    And this brings me to another idea, that the client_ignore_file should be handled via the userprofile on the server and also be synced. I bet there are tons of users who sync files from one pc to the server and to another pc and smart phone and laptop and mac and linux box. So It's not really cool to setup the ignores on all clients one by one.
    Is this now a Client or a Core enhancement? XD

    @oparoz

    I think this is too global :D But thanks anyway^^

    Should I change the title?

  7. added this to the backlog milestone on Oct 9, 2015
  8. PVince81 commented on Oct 7, 2016

    @PVince81
    Contributor

    Some ideas here as well: #25873

    Basically having the server send an extra Webdav property to tell clients that this file/folder exists but must not be synced. How and when this property is set could, as per this ticket here (not the linked one), would be to have code return this property for excluded file patterns as well.

  9. PVince81 commented on Oct 7, 2016

    @PVince81
    Contributor

    Add webdav property to tell sync client to not sync an entry: #26311

  10. PVince81 commented on Sep 11, 2017

    @PVince81
    Contributor

    or advertise a global exclusion list through the capabilities API

  11. PVince81 commented on Dec 18, 2017

    @PVince81
    Contributor

    Closing in favor of #7956

  12. lock commented on Aug 2, 2019

    @lock

    This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

  13. locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators on Aug 2, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions