starred/Prowlarr

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/Prowlarr/Prowlarr.git synced 2026-03-02 22:57:22 -05:00

Allow for Infinite seeding (-1) #1070

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-20 10:06:59 -05:00 by deekerman · 4 comments

deekerman commented

2026-02-20 10:06:59 -05:00

Owner

Originally created by @Minituff on GitHub (Aug 7, 2024).

Is there an existing issue for this?

I have searched the existing open and closed issues
I do see a related issue for this https://github.com/Prowlarr/Prowlarr/issues/1990 , but I don't understand the workaround since I cannot set -1 in qbit

I can't set seed limits except more than 0. This means there MUST be some sort of limit on seeding.

I cannot set the value to -1 in qbit otherwise the feature gets disable then then all seeding limits do not get passed into qbit.

This is what happens when I click save:
CAnt set to 0

I must have these boxes check for the sonarr/radarr to send ratio/time limits to qbit.

Describe the solution you'd like

Allow for a setting of -1 for infinite seeding.

Describe alternatives you've considered

I possibly could use something like Qbitmange?

Anything else?

Originally created by @Minituff on GitHub (Aug 7, 2024). ### Is there an existing issue for this? - [X] I have searched the existing open and closed issues - I do see a related issue for this https://github.com/Prowlarr/Prowlarr/issues/1990 , but I don't understand the workaround since I cannot set -1 in qbit ### Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe I can't set seed limits except more than 0. This means there MUST be some sort of limit on seeding. I cannot set the value to `-1` in qbit otherwise the feature gets disable then then all seeding limits do not get passed into qbit. This is what happens when I click save: <img width="538" alt="CAnt set to 0" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/89aec026-883c-43f5-9af6-64dc16492f03"> I *must* have these boxes check for the sonarr/radarr to send ratio/time limits to qbit. ### Describe the solution you'd like Allow for a setting of `-1` for infinite seeding. ### Describe alternatives you've considered I possibly could use something like Qbitmange? ### Anything else?

deekerman

2026-02-20 10:06:59 -05:00

closed this issue
added the
Type: Feature Request

Status: Won't Fix

Type: Duplicate
labels

deekerman commented

2026-02-20 10:07:00 -05:00

Author

Owner

@bakerboy448 commented on GitHub (Aug 7, 2024):

Duplicate of #1990

@bakerboy448 commented on GitHub (Aug 7, 2024): Duplicate of #1990

deekerman commented

2026-02-20 10:07:00 -05:00

Author

Owner

@Minituff commented on GitHub (Aug 7, 2024):

Okay I understand now. I was able to get it working using this method.

You can set a value to -1, you will just get a warning, but you can press save anyway.

I can confirm this is working in Qbit. Thank you.

@Minituff commented on GitHub (Aug 7, 2024): Okay I understand now. I was able to get it working using this method. * You can set a value to `-1`, you will just get a warning, but you can **press save anyway.** ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5b8019df-7116-4676-b32c-71bb59304d5a) I can confirm this is working in Qbit. Thank you.

deekerman commented

2026-02-20 10:07:00 -05:00

Author

Owner

@aqsede commented on GitHub (Sep 2, 2024):

In transmission it goes to 65535 only (around 45 Days) , if I set to 999eˣ..(Xunlimited) it will be assuming app default
I want some tracker to be able to set to unlimited, but not default on all app...

@aqsede commented on GitHub (Sep 2, 2024): In transmission it goes to 65535 only (around 45 Days) , if I set to 999eˣ..(Xunlimited) it will be assuming app default I want some tracker to be able to set to unlimited, but not default on all app... ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f0b22135-1789-458f-86e5-116970e16046) ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f0a22cdb-1afd-4cc0-b656-2313e2c29bab)

deekerman commented

2026-02-20 10:07:00 -05:00

Author

Owner

@bakerboy448 commented on GitHub (Sep 2, 2024):

Please don't comment on unrelated issues.

if there are issues with Starr implementations of transmission they need to be fixed in Starr.

Prowlarr has nothing to do with how Starr interact with transmission or what limits are set

@bakerboy448 commented on GitHub (Sep 2, 2024): Please don't comment on unrelated issues. if there are issues with Starr implementations of transmission they need to be fixed in Starr. Prowlarr has nothing to do with how Starr interact with transmission or what limits are set