Just installed Syncthing on my Scale server. It looks like it doesn’t have users but rather folder IDs that are then used to sync devices. One of the cool features of Nextcloud is the ability to share files with other users. Can this be done with Syncthing?

  • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Seafile is a file platform that’s more in line with what you mean. It can do sync but also sharing and collaborative editing.

    • trilobite@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Mmm, Seafile is is developed by an for-profit organisation. Looks interesting but might stick with nextcloud if I have to move to Seafile. Syncthing seems really robust and simple. I think its just the file sharing bit that I’m missing. Nextcloud is just a beast.

      • BCsven@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Seafile has a free open source edition, and even their paid enterprise license is free under 3 users

  • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Syncthing is very, very good at syncing, but I get the sense the developers are very specific about keeping to the core objective. There have been other features that would be nice, like have one device sync and archive old/removed files, that many have asked for but rejected. (There is a way, but it’s clunky and sometimes gets out of sync.)

    I don’t think a cross-user sync solution would ever come to this app. You’ll have to create a unique folder and “device” for that.

    • trilobite@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      So this is where I’m getting confused. Say I want to share a folder with my wife. We each have a phone: Phone_1 and Phone_2. I need to create two devices (Phone_1 and Phone_2) and 3 folders (my_folder, wife_folder, shared_folder). Phone_1 would sync to my_folder + shared_folder whereas my wifes phone (phone_2) would sync to wife_folder + shared_folder. All shared files would go in shared_folder. Both of us can edit files in the shared_folder?

      • rambos@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        You create a folder on one device and share it with other device. Both can edit files if you set the folder type as “Send & Receive”. If you edit the same file at the same time you will end up with 2 copies

        • trilobite@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Its an unlikely event that both would be editing the same file at the same time. I think I’ve achieved this. Been messing with Syncthing today. we each have a “shared” folder on our phones and the server has one too. I selected to share with both devices.

          The trick now is when you have a PC with multiple users that want to share that “shared” folder. I need to work that one out … :-)

          • sorter_plainview@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Here one crucial element that needs to be highlighted is Syncthing is decentralised by design. I mean it is different from a server-client way of thinking. It is very much like how git stores content, if you are familiar with it.

            For example, let us say I have 5 devices and there is a folder I want in all my devices kept in sync. Since there is no server, to propagate updates made in one device (let us call it Source Device) to other devices, it has to happen either directly, or indirectly. Here I’m assuming all 5 devices are configured to communicate with each other directly.

            Whenever one of the other 4 devices (Device 1) becomes ‘online’ at the same time as of Source Device, the sync will happen. This is the direct way. The indirect one is, let us say after the sync happened between Source Device and Device 1, the Source Device goes ‘offline’, but the Device 1 continues to be ‘online’, now if Device 2 comes online, the change will be propagated from Device 1 to Device 2.

            Note that the assumption, one device configired with all other devices is not the case, propagation of change has to take a path that similar to indirect way, even if all the devices are simultaneously online.

            This configuration, where each device is configured to communicate with all other, is a pain to maintain, since Syncthing is not designed like a publish-subscribe model. What people usually do is, an always-on device (usually a server) is used as one of the devices that need to be kept in sync. Again, this is not a client server model, but each device is a ‘node’, and the always-on device is also just another node.

            As you already experienced, it is very easy to get sync conflicts, if a folder is shared between multiple users, because of this decentralised design. In my opinion Syncthing works best for a single user. My use cases are, syncing my notes between pc and mobile, sync files scanned with the mobile to my pc, etc.

            If your case is more focused on multiple users, WebDAV server can be an option. But again it’s not straight forward and may not cover all use cases. Depending on what you are trying to achieve, a tool more suitable might be available. For example, if the aim is collaborative development there is Iroh (Still in early stages of development)

            I hope this helps.

            • trilobite@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              I actually do have an always on server and I was planning on using it as a client-server type system. I think that the file sharing option is complicated to implement. I tried to launch syncthing in my wifes environment on the laptop and while I get a new ID, when I register it with the server, it complains saying that there are conflicts with the IDs for the device. I wonder if its getting confused by having two IDs against the same IP

              • sorter_plainview@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                IP should not cause any issues. IDs are just a hash of certificate used by Syncthing. Can you elaborate a little on the current setup? Device, OS, User, etc. Also if possible can you explain your use case? As I mentioned, Syncthing is very specific to what it can do, so it may not be the best solution for your case.

                • trilobite@lemmy.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Server is Truenas Scale. Syncthing is running as app. I and wife have it installed on Android phones. We both share a Debian 12 laptop with different logins. We both want to keep respective phone synced with laptop login. We want to have a folder shared on nas where we can exchange files.

  • MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Syncthing keeps folders in sync between multiple devices, it doesn’t have any concept of users since it’s not designed for that.

    You want Nextcloud or similar ‘google drive’ replacement if you want to share individual files and folders with specific users easily.

    • marcos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Personally, I’d really like if it could have different users on its management interface, with their own file shares.

      It’s understandable why they don’t bother, but I would like to share my NAS without running several instances.

        • marcos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Hum, no. The last thing I need on the world is a piece of non-working hard to maintain software.

          I’d write something before trying Nextcloud again.

          • Semperverus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Nextcloud works just fine on my system, must be something with the way you set stuff up.