I think there is a bug in the download syncronizer.
It allows only for assert resolve in ("remote", "ask", "skip")
Then what we get in the on_conflict method is :
elif resolve == "remote" or (is_newer and resolve == "old") or \
(not is_newer and resolve == "new"):
self._log_action("copy", "conflict", "*<*", pair.local)
self._copy_file(self.remote, self.local, pair.remote)
Which clearly just copies every files again and again since i kinda need to use remote all the time
If only the remote file is newer,
=> no conflict, we simply copy to local
If only the local file is newer,
=> no conflict, but we skip the entry because in download mode remote is read-only
The --force option can be used copy remote to local instead
If both files are modified ('conflict') and the remote file is newer,
--resolve=remote will copy
This would be the same effect as --resolve=new
If both files are modified ('conflict') and the local file is newer,
--resolve=remote will replace the newer with the older
--resolve=new would have no effect, since remote is read-only => this would leave the entry unresolved
If both files are unmodified (the most common case probably)
=> no copying at all
Could you explain in which scenario you think there are missing options or too much copying?
I think there is a bug in the download syncronizer. It allows only for
assert resolve in ("remote", "ask", "skip")
Then what we get in theon_conflict
method is :Which clearly just copies every files again and again since i kinda need to use
remote
all the time