Desktop: ignore a local-folder instead of un checking sync - avoid deleting localfolders

[dkebler]

I don't expect much traction here given this has been a known issue/feature request for some time. Still the moderator at the forum requested I make an issue based on the work around I provided there. Rather than repeat all the details I refer you to the forum post.

The feature request is to make the current folder check box work in a different way. Have it ignore a folder for syncing instead (as I do now but adding it to ignore list). If one wants the current functionality you just allow it to sync first then uncheck it to "unlink" it. Then if the user! decides they can then delete those local files/folders knowing that a copy is in the cloud.

https://help.nextcloud.com/t/ignore-a-local-folder-instead-of-un-checking-sync-avoid-deleting-local-folders/45044

[TheNomad11]

any news about this topic?

[pevogam]

I just lost two virtual machines and an encrypted file with important data deleted by this "great" feature on a desktop client of Nextcloud. I created a file "local" within the root folder synced to the cloud and unchecked it, saw the warning that it will be deleted and interpreted it as in "being deleted once to make sure there is a clean later ignorable folder" and agreed, copying the data to a safe place. Then I moved the data back and used the cloud (syncing and everything) for a day until today I synced an image from a phone device which removed the local folder entirely again on the desktop and took down a few running virtual machines that I only have left in RAM memory now.

May I ask, after the two-day-delayed-time-bomb of a shock I just experienced, why on Earth would unchecking a folder mean "deleting" it rather than ignoring it? Why can't deleting it be something more explicitly done by a nice red "Delete" button or full-awareness action on the side of the user? Why can't deleting place the files in a recycle bin rather than do this one-directionally, at least the one that doesn't come from synchronization?

I understood from the link above that in some sense this is a better approach to file synchronization. Can somebody elaborate why exactly? What exactly is wrong with unchecking a file at the client GUI specifically to tell it to not sync something and to leave such direct modification of files (changing, deleting, adding) to the file manager and end user? Or remove these functionality-duplicating check boxes altogether?

[kilrau]

News / related issues? Unticking a folder to delete something locally is really bad UX and unintended behavior in almost every case. I'd be happy to work on the UI/UX side if a developer decides to pick this up.