arvidn
request feature: Swarm Merging
as per qbittorrent, they said to post the request for swarm merging to this development. see following paste:
Sometimes there are multiple torrents of the same data but the availability is low or incomplete and it would be nice to merge torrents. In vuze the is something like swarm merging: https://wiki.vuze.com/w/Swarm_Merging
It is possible to implement this too in qbittorrent?
Keep up the good work!
Please provide the following information
libtorrent version (or branch):
platform/architecture:
compiler and compiler version:
please describe what symptom you see, what you would expect to see instead and how to reproduce it.
@arvidn as a suggestion, perhaps labeling this as "enhancement"/"help wanted" & "pinning" it would garner more exposure from others who may be interested or indeed be in a position to make a "PR" to introduce this "feature request".
Also, another previous ticket: #3272
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
![stale[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1724?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
guess that is one way to lower the workload ;) it would be nice to have IMHO, but not critical.
use case:
I read alot. like alot! I use LazyLibrarian to constantly search for and download ebooks/abooks from my Goodreads' "To Read" list with Jackett from a massive list of public trackers. LazyLibrarian then queues them in a torrent client (currently qbittorrent) I'd like the torrent client (qbittorrent) to be able to swarm merge those torrents as usually trackers might duplicate a torrent by adding their own "tracked by xxx" text files & other trash. in addition most (like 80%) of book torrents have little to no seeds or if they are seeded, they are slooooooow af, so thats an obvious use case for swarm merge
@allanlaal Completely agree but, I think swarm merging will be more feasible with the wider adoption of BitTorrent v2 and hybrid torrents.
https://blog.libtorrent.org/2020/09/bittorrent-v2 https://torrentfreak.com/libtorrent-adds-support-for-bittorrent-v2-a-potential-game-changer-200912
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
Should not be closed imo.
Also, the stale bot not should have a tag "don't mark this as stalled", which will stop the "not stale" noise. That tag should be added to this issue and to others like it
Lets STOP using stale bots!: https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/issues/6797
Your feature request is still open in my issue: https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/issues/6578
@cocokola @allanlaal @TheBestPessimist I was able to teach libtorrent to load data from another torrent. I used https torrents for that. My free Android app Media Library (based on libtorrent 1.2.13) supports swarm merging. Enjoy!
You folks are the bomb! Impressive work overall. Thank you!
On Sun, May 1, 2022, 7:17 AM Oleg @.***> wrote:
@cocokola https://github.com/cocokola @allanlaal https://github.com/allanlaal @TheBestPessimist https://github.com/TheBestPessimist I was able to teach libtorrent to load data from another torrent. I used https torrents for that. My free Android app Media Library (based on libtorrent 1.2.13) supports swarm merging. Enjoy!
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/issues/4936#issuecomment-1114220988, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACLTLQKLEP6EU3VQJ4WA2RDVHZY53ANCNFSM4PSZU4SQ . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>
@arvidn could you reopen this issue - its kind of an important feature imho :D
I would like this. I thought it wasn't going to be added because it is marked as closed, but now I see the stalebot closed it and "Closed" is not quite accurate
the reason the swarm merging feature hasn't been implemented is not because this issue was inactive and closed by the stale bot. The reason it hasn't been implemented is because nobody has volunteered to do it.
unstale!
@arvidn kill all stale bots! ;)
we still care about this feature, but things of this complexity take time in OpenSource
a ticket being stale and closed is not a sign of people not caring. It's a sign of work not being done. Keeping tickets open does not make it any more likely for work to be done.
a ticket being stale and closed is not a sign of people not caring. It's a sign of work not being done. Keeping tickets open does not make it any more likely for work to be done.
I quite disagree with that. People looking for what could they generally improve upon wont check closed issues, because that normally means that it has been resolved, superseeded by an other one, or dismissed.
By allowing the stale bot to close the issue, and not reopening it, you are dismissing this feature, and saying that "if no one is implementing it, surely it is unnecessary".
I quite disagree with that. People looking for what could they generally improve upon wont check closed issues
I don't think those people exist. Contributors either have a feature they need or want for their project, or they have users requesting a feature, or they solicit feedback or requests from some group of people.
The default in Github is open issues, so when you search and find nothing, it seems like nobody else wants it
I don't think those people exist. Contributors either have a feature they need or want for their project, or they have users requesting a feature,
You may be right, I don't actually know who are the contributors in this project.
or they solicit feedback or requests from some group of people
I think that includes the issue tracker of the project, though. Where else is it a better place to search for good new feature ideas? Suggestions are naturally appearing at that place.
Whatever is the chance that someone would start working on this feature by finding this issue, I think its significantly lower if the issue is closed. All the while the chance of users opening duplicates is higher. When I'm opening an issue, be it a feature request or a bug report at any repository, I only search in the (usually much fewer) open issues, and when it seems useful then also in the first page of closed issues, but I never go through all of those. In the case of this project, there are only 105 open issues, but 1900 closed ones. Rarely I did go through all of the closed issue search results, for example on the Gitea repo, but most often it took a hour or more to do that.
I finished downloading a torrent from another torrent. It's been a while. Maybe this will help you somehow https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/issues/6578#issuecomment-1493174000
And read all the duplicate issues (check for updates) you create.