You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 27, 2024. It is now read-only.
Hello,
thanks for the work done here, it is working really good! :)
I would love to see some "feeling of the process". What I mean with that is getting some number that gives you the idea of how advanced the Synchronisation is. I tried to read the source to understand how it works, but I am not programmer myself...but if the software gets a list of files from the Local directory, and also a list of files from the remote drive, maybe a numerical hint would give the user some interesting information:
1234 Local files, 102 synced.
345 remote files, 302 synced.
(OR MAYBE 8.26% uplink synced, 87.5% downlink synced ).
Again, this is just very naive improvement, but I think it can be nice to have it (and maybe, maybe, it could be easy to implement).
Thanks again :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Hello,
thanks for the work done here, it is working really good! :)
I would love to see some "feeling of the process". What I mean with that is getting some number that gives you the idea of how advanced the Synchronisation is. I tried to read the source to understand how it works, but I am not programmer myself...but if the software gets a list of files from the Local directory, and also a list of files from the remote drive, maybe a numerical hint would give the user some interesting information:
1234 Local files, 102 synced.
345 remote files, 302 synced.
(OR MAYBE 8.26% uplink synced, 87.5% downlink synced ).
Again, this is just very naive improvement, but I think it can be nice to have it (and maybe, maybe, it could be easy to implement).
Thanks again :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: