Hi all,
making a completely flexible filter system is hard, if not impossible. However, i think the current system could be greatly improved with the includion of an additional set of rules for a force include. This would modify the behaviour this way:
"an item is included if it matches a rule in force include, or if it matches a rule in include AND none of the exclude rules".
Usage scenario:
I have folder1 which contains a number of files and subfolders, among which folder2. Folder2, in turn, contains a number of subfolders among which some have a name that can be singled out easily with a filter (let's say the many include "syncme".
I want to sync all the files and subfolders in folder1, with the exception of folder2, for which I only want the subfolders marked with "syncme" to be synced.
Currently, I don't see a way of doing it (if not creating two jobs).
With a force-include set of rules available, you could do something like this:
base folder: folder1
include: *
exclude: folder2
force include: \folder2\*syncme*
I'm sure there are many other usage scenarios. I just happen to have this specific problem... would it be really hard to implement?
Feature request: force include
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 27 Jun 2016
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 27 Jun 2016
You can achieve this by using two identical base folder pairs:
Folder Pair 1:
include: *
exclude: folder2
folder Pair 2:
include: \folder2\*syncme*
exclude: [empty]
Folder Pair 1:
include: *
exclude: folder2
folder Pair 2:
include: \folder2\*syncme*
exclude: [empty]
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 27 Jun 2016
Besides my thanks for the reply, I owe you my apologies for the question itself.
I did not realize that there was the possibility of setting local filter for every filter pair. With this possibility, the solution is indeed quite obvious.
Thanks again.
Giacomo
I did not realize that there was the possibility of setting local filter for every filter pair. With this possibility, the solution is indeed quite obvious.
Thanks again.
Giacomo