Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make it more intuitive to manage multiple peers #1696

Closed
Tcll opened this issue Dec 11, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

Make it more intuitive to manage multiple peers #1696

Tcll opened this issue Dec 11, 2020 · 2 comments
Labels
need/triage Needs initial labeling and prioritization

Comments

@Tcll
Copy link

Tcll commented Dec 11, 2020

Whenever you generate a new key with ipfs key gen --type=rsa --size=2048 peername, it seems messy to set up a folder in the self peer to assign to the new peer.

My idea to manage this is to have a dropdown selection on the PEER ID entry in the STATUS table.
The contents of the dropdown selection would be the keys from ipfs key list

What I expect here is selecting an alternate key and then clicking the FILES tab will allow you to manage the files of the selected peer.

EDIT: Since the current setup relies on folders, integrating this could provide an alternate option to automatically create a static root folder under the new peer name within the self peer.
(the folder could be highlighted red to denote it as a sub-peer)
Being an option, this could be disabled for the current behavior.

@Tcll Tcll added the need/triage Needs initial labeling and prioritization label Dec 11, 2020
@Tcll Tcll changed the title Make it possible to manage another peer Make it more intuitive to manage multiple peers Dec 11, 2020
@jessicaschilling
Copy link
Contributor

Cool idea! @lidel - your thoughts on this? Ideally we'd also be able to generate a new key from the UI, but in the meantime could be a nice perk for folks who have done it from the command line.

@jessicaschilling
Copy link
Contributor

Rolling this into the larger discussion at ipfs/ipfs-gui#77 and closing this sub-issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
need/triage Needs initial labeling and prioritization
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants