Hi, On 12/11/2013 05:35 PM, Fabrice Rossi wrote: > Of course, but I think it would be nice to allow the possibility for > optimized specialized implementations. I know for sure that the Java > watch service is super basic compared to linux inotify. As there is a > java-inotify implementation, it would be a great bonus under linux to > be able to inject it instead of the standard service. But that for > version 3.0 ;-)
Right now we're just registering _that_ something happened and trigger a 'sync'. We're not registering _what_ happened. That is on purpose to keep the complexity as low as possible. Back in the old Syncany in 2011, I used jpathwatch (http://jpathwatch.wordpress.com/), which implements the WatchService API, but uses native libraries to do so (inotify for Linux). The library works great, but I failed miserably when trying to implement a recursive watcher that registers and _tracks_ file changes: moving file trees, extracting archives and lots of temp files are a nightmare when you're doing a detailed tracking. So for now, I don't think we need the extra inotify power, I think. :-) Best Philipp -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~syncany-team Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~syncany-team More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
