2 ms·

I personally found the entire syncthing process convoluted and over complicated to the point of giving up several times before I actually got it working. Am I r

by donatj 4y ago

I personally found the entire syncthing process convoluted and over complicated to the point of giving up several times before I actually got it working. Am I remembering correctly that you need to allow every machine to sync to every other machine individually?

sowbug 4y ago
No. I don't know whether my setup is typical, but I have one machine that new machines have designated as an "introducer," so each machine eventually learns about the existence of the others. As for syncing itself, it just works. I have a $4/month virtual server running Syncthing, so every machine that's online always has at least one to connect to. Changes typically propagate through that one. But before I went that route, data eventually got where it needed to go.
- dlyons 4y ago
  I do the same thing and have bash scripts that run on my server to ingest data I find useful. I use org-roam and org-daily to keep a journal in Emacs, and text from across the web or my life just arrives that is important for that day. Examples: my likes on Twitter, highlights on the web (highlight something, right click "Import to Readwise", it downloads into Emacs via syncthing), calendar events, etc. I'm always collecting stuff that I can reference later without much effort after the initial setup. It just works.
jbverschoor 4y ago
Same here, and I don’t really like the networking part on their end. It makes more sense if it’s combined with for example wireguard
Groxx 4y ago
Convoluted and over-complicated, and prone to syncing issues and latency that are extremely difficult to resolve without a lot of context, yeah. Much of it is that it's a truly distributed system, so each computer you connect is untrusted - it doesn't fit well with use-cases of people migrating from Dropbox. It can be made to work, without all that much trouble, but it's based on a very different set of assumptions and it shows. (I say this as a mostly very happy user of it, and I do recommend it. But you're not going to be successful in migrating your non-tech-enthusiast friends or family)

by donatj 4y ago

sowbug 4y ago

No. I don't know whether my setup is typical, but I have one machine that new machines have designated as an "introducer," so each machine eventually learns about the existence of the others. As for syncing itself, it just works. I have a $4/month virtual server running Syncthing, so every machine that's online always has at least one to connect to. Changes typically propagate through that one. But before I went that route, data eventually got where it needed to go.

dlyons 4y ago
I do the same thing and have bash scripts that run on my server to ingest data I find useful. I use org-roam and org-daily to keep a journal in Emacs, and text from across the web or my life just arrives that is important for that day. Examples: my likes on Twitter, highlights on the web (highlight something, right click "Import to Readwise", it downloads into Emacs via syncthing), calendar events, etc. I'm always collecting stuff that I can reference later without much effort after the initial setup. It just works.

jbverschoor 4y ago

Same here, and I don’t really like the networking part on their end. It makes more sense if it’s combined with for example wireguard

Groxx 4y ago

Convoluted and over-complicated, and prone to syncing issues and latency that are extremely difficult to resolve without a lot of context, yeah. Much of it is that it's a truly distributed system, so each computer you connect is untrusted - it doesn't fit well with use-cases of people migrating from Dropbox. It can be made to work, without all that much trouble, but it's based on a very different set of assumptions and it shows. (I say this as a mostly very happy user of it, and I do recommend it. But you're not going to be successful in migrating your non-tech-enthusiast friends or family)