syncany-team team mailing list archive

[Philipp Heckel <philipp.heckel@xxxxxxxxx>]

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