i just upgraded to the newest version and broke my entire structure.
let people who want to use aliases use aliases.
let people who want to use .lnk's use .lnk's.
theres no reason both cant be happy.
request: .lnk shortcuts aliases filezilla server
Moderator: Project members
request: .lnk shortcuts aliases filezilla server
please bring back the ability to follow .lnk shortcuts in directories. aliases are good too, but sometimes .lnk shortcuts are easier to maintain across many users and groups. it requires ZERO modification in filezilla, and quick maintainenance in windows because you can just drag and drop shortcuts.
i just upgraded to the newest version and broke my entire structure.
let people who want to use aliases use aliases.
let people who want to use .lnk's use .lnk's.
theres no reason both cant be happy.
i just upgraded to the newest version and broke my entire structure.
let people who want to use aliases use aliases.
let people who want to use .lnk's use .lnk's.
theres no reason both cant be happy.
okay i understand that aliases are more powerful. i get it.
how does that justify FORCING people to use them? it seems unnecessary to me. it was one simple checkbox. what if other folders have shortcuts too. it means recreating an entire structure of alises for every single user or usergroup in each folder that you have.
if you base it on standard windows .lnk's that you can follow yourself then its no problem. just create it once. done. it works when you navigate it on your own. it works when you view those directories in any usergroup.
.lnk's are a windows standard. removing the ability to follow them would be like saying "sorry filezilla ftp client doesnt support organizing contents by name anymore. only organization by file type and date in descending order." its irrational. if someone wants to organize that way, let them.
what was also so great about .lnk's was that if you had them all in a directory... just an enormous shortcut directory... whatever you gave access to in filezilla settings, the user would only see the shortcut they could follow. it was simplistic genius.
i also just tried fiddling around with aliaes, and it wont let you create them in the home directory because it creates a recursive directory structure? who cares frankly. if someone is stupid enough to not realize that they keep going in circles on your ftp site, they should be shot. perhaps i am misunderstanding what is really going on. as i mentioned before, .lnk's are easier for me.
sorry im coming off now as agressive or angry, but frankly... i am alittle pissed. i know you guys are trying to make a good simple but powerful product, and you do very well. its just that i BEG you to please reconsider .lnk's. there really isnt a justification to REMOVE the option. it only makes sense to just encourage use of aliases for reasons X, X and X.
how does that justify FORCING people to use them? it seems unnecessary to me. it was one simple checkbox. what if other folders have shortcuts too. it means recreating an entire structure of alises for every single user or usergroup in each folder that you have.
if you base it on standard windows .lnk's that you can follow yourself then its no problem. just create it once. done. it works when you navigate it on your own. it works when you view those directories in any usergroup.
.lnk's are a windows standard. removing the ability to follow them would be like saying "sorry filezilla ftp client doesnt support organizing contents by name anymore. only organization by file type and date in descending order." its irrational. if someone wants to organize that way, let them.
what was also so great about .lnk's was that if you had them all in a directory... just an enormous shortcut directory... whatever you gave access to in filezilla settings, the user would only see the shortcut they could follow. it was simplistic genius.
i also just tried fiddling around with aliaes, and it wont let you create them in the home directory because it creates a recursive directory structure? who cares frankly. if someone is stupid enough to not realize that they keep going in circles on your ftp site, they should be shot. perhaps i am misunderstanding what is really going on. as i mentioned before, .lnk's are easier for me.
sorry im coming off now as agressive or angry, but frankly... i am alittle pissed. i know you guys are trying to make a good simple but powerful product, and you do very well. its just that i BEG you to please reconsider .lnk's. there really isnt a justification to REMOVE the option. it only makes sense to just encourage use of aliases for reasons X, X and X.
removing lnk support IS a mean to encourage the use of aliases 
honestly, windows lnk files are evil in very way, if you're using ntfs as your file system, consider using hardlinks / junctions instead (see e.g. awxLink at http://www.arniworld.de/downloads.htm). they are directly integrated into the file system (and not "text files" as lnk files), so fzs follows them.
honestly, windows lnk files are evil in very way, if you're using ntfs as your file system, consider using hardlinks / junctions instead (see e.g. awxLink at http://www.arniworld.de/downloads.htm). they are directly integrated into the file system (and not "text files" as lnk files), so fzs follows them.with all due respect i think you are missing the point.
its not about what is a better option for what. its about what works. its about what is common & convenient. its about what is already understood.
example:
---
sometimes you dont have to make your apartment door voice recognition activated with an eyeball and fingerprint scanners. believe it or not, people like the common metal key. they work. they are very common. and people understand how to use them already.
can one go and install third party software or hardware or use new and more powerful security methods to safeguard their apartment door? of course they can if that is their choice. however, some people dont care and would rather just continue to use the common metal key that they already have, have used for years, and who's use is almost instinctual it is so common.
maybe metal door keys dont have the :u property, or arent as powerful as third party software /junctions... but they have other strengths and uses. one doesnt outweigh the other, and unfortunately that seems to be why it was removed. imagine that filezilla disabled the ability to follow /junctions, if it could, for whatever reason. it would be the same thing.
---
i am still hoping you will reconsider the convenience or alternate pro's of using .LNK files again. they are far from being useless, and do actually make organizing things easier in certain circumstances & requirements.
in this case you really can have your cake and eat it too.
again thank you for reading my plea.
its not about what is a better option for what. its about what works. its about what is common & convenient. its about what is already understood.
example:
---
sometimes you dont have to make your apartment door voice recognition activated with an eyeball and fingerprint scanners. believe it or not, people like the common metal key. they work. they are very common. and people understand how to use them already.
can one go and install third party software or hardware or use new and more powerful security methods to safeguard their apartment door? of course they can if that is their choice. however, some people dont care and would rather just continue to use the common metal key that they already have, have used for years, and who's use is almost instinctual it is so common.
maybe metal door keys dont have the :u property, or arent as powerful as third party software /junctions... but they have other strengths and uses. one doesnt outweigh the other, and unfortunately that seems to be why it was removed. imagine that filezilla disabled the ability to follow /junctions, if it could, for whatever reason. it would be the same thing.
---
i am still hoping you will reconsider the convenience or alternate pro's of using .LNK files again. they are far from being useless, and do actually make organizing things easier in certain circumstances & requirements.
in this case you really can have your cake and eat it too.
again thank you for reading my plea.