I just heard about plexdrive as I haven’t been on the forums in a while. I don’t know if anyone knows but in reading on it, why did the developer chose to create a separate program instead of contributing to the rclone project? Just curious. The main reason I started using rclone is to avoid the nightmare of having a program to upload, one to encrypt, and one to mount. I really don’t want to start heading back in that direction.
To prevent bans when using programs like plex to scan your rclone mount. If you do, you’ll notice it within a short time you’ll hit the 24 hour ban. With plexdrive, you will not.
I know what it’s for. My question is, why a separate program? Why not just contribute to rclone and submit a pull request?
To be honest, I wish that was the case and make life easy. Probably the amount of work involved. PD4 and PD5 are very different and there was a lot of beta testing on the author’s end. Maybe the maintenance involved.
Why ask here rather than ask the PlexDrive dev?
Good point. I actually looked at the github page but didn’t find a community forum or anything to raise the question and I guess I just didn’t think of messaging the dev directly.
plexdrive looks like a very tightly focused tool:
- use of fuse limits support to a sub-set of *NIX systems + MacOS
- Only supports Google Drive
So yeah, I can see creating a new tool, rather than crafting a limited feature set into a cross-cloud service/OS tool like rclone. It would likely be really confusing from a support POV to have these features in a “beta” mode in the broader rclone app, not to mention any issues from the added code in the fairly stable rclone codebase.
Also: You don’t have to message the dev. Every Github comes with an issue tracker for exactly these kinds of questions (as well as general problems), here’s plexdrive’s. If they prefer questions elsewhere they’ll usually tell you. Using it means you can ask this question on an open forum where others than the dev can reply – just like here.