Very basic feature request: per-directory transfer log

[dandv]

Hi,

I've been a big fan of Filezilla since before version 2, and I promoted it throughout the company I work in (instead of WS_FTP), but management wouldn't approve the transition because of a small feature that we need and WS_FTP has:

When you transfer file(s) from a local directory to a server, WS_FTP creates a WS_FTP.LOG file containing, for each transfer, the timestamp, local path, transfer direction and remote path.

Management needs these log files to track when files were transferred and it would be awkward for them to look in the global RTF transfer log. We also donated $20 through Sourceforge.net because we think FileZilla has great potential.

I'm sure it would be extremely easy to implement this transfer log feature and we could finally get rid of WS_FTP.

Thank you,
Dan Dascalescu
System and Network Administrator
HighTech Passport, Ltd.
http://www.htpassport.com

[cameronsto]

Ewww....WS_FTP...I can still remember that stupid horn noise it would make after connecting...

-cameron

[dandv]

Ewww....WS_FTP...I can still remember that stupid horn noise it would make after connecting...

-cameron

Management also asked me why I promote FileZilla... So how is FileZilla better than WS_FTP?

+ modern interface
+ Secure FTP support
+ better Site manager (tree vs. list)
- FileZilla lacks the stupid per-directory transfer log file

What else?

[botg]

I'm sure it would be extremely easy to implement this transfer log feature and we could finally get rid of WS_FTP.

I have to disagree. The whole log system is too rudimentary, changes to it require a lot of work.

[dandv]

I'm sure it would be extremely easy to implement this transfer log feature and we could finally get rid of WS_FTP.

I have to disagree. The whole log system is too rudimentary, changes to it require a lot of work.

All WS_FTP does is a very rudimentary log:

• time of initiating the transfer
• filename being transferred (surely FileZilla must know that! :-)
• remote filename (even the remote path alone would do, to avoid rescanning the remote directory in case the file was auto-renamed upon upload)
• direction of transfer (upload/download)

How difficult would this be to implement?

[dandv]

I've posted this issue on my blog, maybe it will draw some attention:

http://dandv.blogspot.com/2006/02/filez ... ement.html