5 ms·

That's probably a clue something needs to be done at the OS level regarding FS integration with cloud syncing systems and permissions.

by bsaul 7y ago

monsieurbanana 7y ago
All major OS already have a permission' system. It's on dropbox & co to honor them. On linux you can create an user group named "cloud", and allow dropbox to only sync files that belong to that group.
- bsaul 7y ago
  Except dropbox will be totally unaware and try to access it. What i envisionned was more like a "control center" app of all the outgoing (and incoming) pipes from your FS to syncing systems, with both last syncing time, configuration, etc. A little bit like what's already happening for mail and calendar integration into iOS applications, only for files and on the desktop.
  - monsieurbanana 7y ago
    Sorry, I edited my post before reading yours. Yes, right now Dropbox would probably crash, but that's their problem. I really don't think it's something that should be handled by the OS when they already have a solution for it.
    - bsaul 7y ago
      Depending on wether you're a linux, windows or mac user, you'll probably have different expectations on what the OS is suppose to provide by default.
- michaelmior 7y ago
  This isn't really a great solution when I have files that are autogenerated. I either have to have the default group be "cloud" and then go back and chgrp these files when they are generated so they don't sync. Or I have to have the default group be something else, and inevitably forget to chgrp for files that I do want backed up.
nolok 7y ago
I really don't think this should be handled at FS level. robots.txt didn't need to know about who the robot was or what the hosting server was.
Symbiote 7y ago
Windows (and some other OSs) have/had an "archive bit" ¹. It used to be visible in the file properties, next to the read-only and hidden attributes, and was labelled "Archive" ² ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archive_bit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archive_bit ² https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/figs/sam2_0801.gif https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/figs/sam2_0801....
- michaelmior 7y ago
  Some file-system level property could work, but the semantics of the archive bit don't match. For files I want to be ignored, I don't think it makes sense to mark them as backed up, which is what the archive bit was designed for.

That's probably a clue something needs to be done at the OS level regarding FS integration with cloud syncing systems and permissions.

by bsaul 7y ago

That's probably a clue something needs to be done at the OS level regarding FS integration with cloud syncing systems and permissions.

monsieurbanana 7y ago

All major OS already have a permission' system. It's on dropbox & co to honor them. On linux you can create an user group named "cloud", and allow dropbox to only sync files that belong to that group.

bsaul 7y ago
Except dropbox will be totally unaware and try to access it. What i envisionned was more like a "control center" app of all the outgoing (and incoming) pipes from your FS to syncing systems, with both last syncing time, configuration, etc. A little bit like what's already happening for mail and calendar integration into iOS applications, only for files and on the desktop.
- monsieurbanana 7y ago
  Sorry, I edited my post before reading yours. Yes, right now Dropbox would probably crash, but that's their problem. I really don't think it's something that should be handled by the OS when they already have a solution for it.
  - bsaul 7y ago
    Depending on wether you're a linux, windows or mac user, you'll probably have different expectations on what the OS is suppose to provide by default.
michaelmior 7y ago
This isn't really a great solution when I have files that are autogenerated. I either have to have the default group be "cloud" and then go back and chgrp these files when they are generated so they don't sync. Or I have to have the default group be something else, and inevitably forget to chgrp for files that I do want backed up.

nolok 7y ago

I really don't think this should be handled at FS level. robots.txt didn't need to know about who the robot was or what the hosting server was.

Symbiote 7y ago

Windows (and some other OSs) have/had an "archive bit" ¹. It used to be visible in the file properties, next to the read-only and hidden attributes, and was labelled "Archive" ² ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archive_bit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archive_bit ² https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/figs/sam2_0801.gif https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/figs/sam2_0801....

michaelmior 7y ago
Some file-system level property could work, but the semantics of the archive bit don't match. For files I want to be ignored, I don't think it makes sense to mark them as backed up, which is what the archive bit was designed for.