Why is there no "STATUS" that the Resume all function ignores?
Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 9:56 am
This is sort of addressed to Nemo based on his response to this thread (sort of kind of):
index.php/topic,3909.msg19908.html#msg19908
I want to start by saying I am not specifically (or at all really) asking for a "Stop" function. I am only frustrated by Nemo and several others complete lack of understanding for why this "stop" function is even desirable at all (again, not asking for a stop function). It's going completely over you guys heads and I just cannot fathom how. To me, this is blatantly obvious. So obvious that I'm stupefied that not only is there no solution to this issue in qBittorrent, but that when the stop function was mentioned, you just couldn't see why it would be handy to solve this problem (and again, not asking for a stop function)...but I digress, here's the actual problem;
I start 20 torrents and 15 finish downloading.
Those same 15 are now at 1:1 and I no longer want them to be active, so I pause them and they are now in both the "Completed" and "Paused" STATUS...
I now wish to pause all my currently active torrents, which would be the remaining 5, so I simply choose pause all.
I'm now ready to resume all those torrents that I just paused...but under the current logic, I cannot do this without having to control click to select all 5 one at a time, then click resume. My other option is "Resume all", but this will resume every single torrent...I know, I know, "resume ALL", but while a function that actually takes every single torrent and resumes them all IS an obvious function, you should realize this is something that is very situational and is not a silver bullet solution at all.
Do you see the problem that I'm trying to shed light on? I honestly feel like you probably don't...and that's based on reading not only the thread that I linked, but the closed thread that is linked within the thread that I linked (threadception...there's the one joke) in which you and a few others not only can't seem to see why a "stop" function would be useful, but insist it is completely pointless...
Maybe it doesn't need a stop function necessarily but this is a problem that really should be addressed. Basically, I (and many others, I've absolutely no doubt) would like to be able to EASILY resume large groups of torrents while others are completely ignored. I don't care how it's done, but a stop function would be the single most obvious way to achieve this.
To summarize: There are currently only two ways to resume torrents. Selecting each one that you wish to resume individually while holding control, then choose resume, OR resume all which may very well want to resume torrents you don't want touched. There needs to be an easier way to resume multiple specific torrents without having to individually click on each one. THAT is why people want a stop button. I don't care that the "Paused" torrents are ACTUALLY stopped and not active at all, I care that I've no way to set torrents aside and have them ignored unless I specifically click on them. One last time, no, I'm not asking for a stop function. I'm pointing out an issue and frustration I have with the current client.
index.php/topic,3909.msg19908.html#msg19908
I want to start by saying I am not specifically (or at all really) asking for a "Stop" function. I am only frustrated by Nemo and several others complete lack of understanding for why this "stop" function is even desirable at all (again, not asking for a stop function). It's going completely over you guys heads and I just cannot fathom how. To me, this is blatantly obvious. So obvious that I'm stupefied that not only is there no solution to this issue in qBittorrent, but that when the stop function was mentioned, you just couldn't see why it would be handy to solve this problem (and again, not asking for a stop function)...but I digress, here's the actual problem;
I start 20 torrents and 15 finish downloading.
Those same 15 are now at 1:1 and I no longer want them to be active, so I pause them and they are now in both the "Completed" and "Paused" STATUS...
I now wish to pause all my currently active torrents, which would be the remaining 5, so I simply choose pause all.
I'm now ready to resume all those torrents that I just paused...but under the current logic, I cannot do this without having to control click to select all 5 one at a time, then click resume. My other option is "Resume all", but this will resume every single torrent...I know, I know, "resume ALL", but while a function that actually takes every single torrent and resumes them all IS an obvious function, you should realize this is something that is very situational and is not a silver bullet solution at all.
Do you see the problem that I'm trying to shed light on? I honestly feel like you probably don't...and that's based on reading not only the thread that I linked, but the closed thread that is linked within the thread that I linked (threadception...there's the one joke) in which you and a few others not only can't seem to see why a "stop" function would be useful, but insist it is completely pointless...
Maybe it doesn't need a stop function necessarily but this is a problem that really should be addressed. Basically, I (and many others, I've absolutely no doubt) would like to be able to EASILY resume large groups of torrents while others are completely ignored. I don't care how it's done, but a stop function would be the single most obvious way to achieve this.
To summarize: There are currently only two ways to resume torrents. Selecting each one that you wish to resume individually while holding control, then choose resume, OR resume all which may very well want to resume torrents you don't want touched. There needs to be an easier way to resume multiple specific torrents without having to individually click on each one. THAT is why people want a stop button. I don't care that the "Paused" torrents are ACTUALLY stopped and not active at all, I care that I've no way to set torrents aside and have them ignored unless I specifically click on them. One last time, no, I'm not asking for a stop function. I'm pointing out an issue and frustration I have with the current client.