ACL and batch mode: improvement proposal

[vstefanoxx]

bsync.txt

Hi

I propose following changes, and attach a diff file bsync.txt with a suggested implementation:

1. -b (batch mode) should in my opinion skip the "Apply actions" prompt (or alternatively would be better provide a silent option)
2. I added --acls, --xattrs and --compress to rsync arguments, just because I needed them: would be nice to add them by default or allow them optionally
3. in conflict prompt I added option "r" and "ra" to allow automatic resolution of conflicts based on following rules:

• in case of deletion on one side, and update on another side, choose sync of updated file instead of deletion of removed file
• in case of updated file in both sides, privilege the most recent file
• in other cases, give precedence to left side

4. I added a -a (autoanswer) option, with which is possible to decide the answer to all conflicts prompts (1, 2 or r)

I know, it can be very dangerous to allow automatic resolution of conflicts, but that's what I need and I think is very helpful to give possibility to a completely background run.

A feature to backup conflicted files and directory would be wonderful. In rsync there is --backup option, but I think is not useful in the cases when rsync is called inside bsync.

I never coded in python, so be indulgent with provided code.

PS
bsync is one of few programs I could find that allow remote and bidirectional synchronization based on rsync with move and rename detection of files and directory.

Thank you for sharing it

[dooblem]

Hello Stefano,

Thanks for using bsync.

My comments
Point 1: right, you found a bug.

Point 2 : Good idea, but I would suggest adding a single option to add any rsync argument (a bit like -o option for ssh). However, for acl and xattrs, pay attention that bsync will not detect changes in acls or xattr (due bsync snapshot file format).

Point 3: I'm not absolutely sure of what is the best algorithm for automatic resolution. But anyway I think there is no perfect solution for that. Sounds good.

Point 4: A -a option will be weird with -b option (and -a is to close to rsync famous option). I would suggest modifying the -b option to accept an argument : with "-b" or "-b e" we get the actual behaviour : exit on conflict.

If you have time, feel free to modify/code. I do not have plenty of time for bsync those days.

Anyway, thanks for your contribution.

Marc

[vstefanoxx]

Hello Marc

If you have time, feel free to modify/code

I never used github to code, I don't know what you mean about it. Can I
modify the main branch or you suggest me to fork?

2016-02-18 21:44 GMT+01:00 Marc MAURICE notifications@github.com:

Hello Stefano,

Thanks for using bsync.

My comments
Point 1: right, you found a bug.

Point 2 : Good idea, but I would suggest adding a single option to add any
rsync argument (a bit like -o option for ssh). However, for acl and xattrs,
pay attention that bsync will not detect changes in acls or xattr (due
bsync snapshot file format).

Point 3: I'm not absolutely sure of what is the best algorithm for
automatic resolution. But anyway I think there is no perfect solution for
that. Sounds good.

Point 4: A -a option will be weird with -b option (and -a is to close to
rsync famous option). I would suggest modifying the -b option to accept an
argument : with "-b" or "-b e" we get the actual behaviour : exit on
conflict.

If you have time, feel free to modify/code. I do not have plenty of time
for bsync those days.

Anyway, thanks for your contribution.

Marc

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#23 (comment).

[dooblem]

You have to fork, make all the changes, then open a pull request.