mirror of
https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent.git
synced 2026-03-02 22:57:32 -05:00
[Wishlist] More granular scheduling control #1966
Labels
No labels
Accessibility
AppImage
Bounty
Build system
CI
Can't reproduce
Code cleanup
Confirmed bug
Confirmed bug
Core
Crash
Data loss
Discussion
Docker
Documentation
Duplicate
Feature
Feature request
Feature request
Feature request
Filters
Flatpak
GUI
Has workaround
I2P
Invalid
Libtorrent
Look and feel
Meta
NSIS
Network
Not an issue
OS: *BSD
OS: Linux
OS: Windows
OS: macOS
PPA
Performance
Project management
Proxy/VPN
Qt bugs
Qt6 compat
RSS
Search engine
Security
Temp folder
Themes
Translations
Triggers
Waiting diagnosis
Waiting info
Waiting upstream
Waiting web implementation
Watched folders
WebAPI
WebUI
autoCloseOldIssue
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
starred/qBittorrent#1966
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @ghost on GitHub (Dec 23, 2014).
It would be nice if the scheduler allowed more control, more like the uTorrent scheduler.
If the uTorrent one is "too much" then even adding a third schedule option would meet my needs.
@chrishirst commented on GitHub (Dec 23, 2014):
take your pick from:
#2009
#2063
#421
#1426
And thanks for using the search feature, ... ... or not as the case maybe.
@ghost commented on GitHub (Dec 23, 2014):
If you notice it was already closed when you commented. I did search, before and after posting it. The only stuff I found was old, or pretty much everyone throwing their hands up in the air.
Was going to broach the subject again, but figured no one wants to take on changing the scheduler and I will just learn to live with it or switch back to uTorrent if I can't.
@chrishirst commented on GitHub (Dec 24, 2014):
You have that choice.
http://qbforums.shiki.hu/index.php/topic,2713.0.html
@ghost commented on GitHub (Dec 26, 2014):
There is no external application that could supplement this request. Are you implying I should do what externally to qBittorent to achieve my goal? Use QOS? I don't understand what you are saying.
The feature already exists in the app, so it must have some merit, Some people are just looking for that feature to be expanded upon.
I agree that requests for already existing apps should not be included. But to equate slightly expanding an existing feature to requesting an AV client be added is ridiculous.
Thanks anyway,
Brian