Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 11, 2019. It is now read-only.

Folder structure is not maintained on sync for imported data on both Pyramid 0 & Pyramid 1 #9174

Closed
srirambv opened this issue May 31, 2017 · 1 comment

Comments

@srirambv
Copy link
Collaborator

  • Did you search for similar issues before submitting this one?
    Yes

  • Describe the issue you encountered:
    Imported data in not properly sync'd between Windows machines

  • Platform (Win7, 8, 10? macOS? Linux distro?):
    Pyramid 0 Windows 10 x64
    Pyramid 1 Windows 7 ia32

  • Brave Version (revision SHA):
    Both running

Name	Version
Brave	0.15.312
rev	cc653ff
Muon	3.0.202
libchromiumcontent	58.0.3029.110
V8	5.8.283.38
Node.js	7.9.0
Update Channel	dev
os.platform	win32
os.release	6.1.7601
os.arch	ia32
  • Steps to reproduce:

    1. Enable Sync on pyramid 0 and sync with pyramid 1 using secret code
    2. Import Chrome data on pyramid 0, shows folder Imported from Chrome
    3. After pyramid 1 sync's and receives data folder structure is lost on pyramid 1
    4. Pyramid 0 recreates the import data similar to pyramid 1 (due to Import data gets duplicated after sync #8508)
  • Actual result:
    Folder structure is not maintained on sync for imported data on both Pyramid 0 & Pyramid 1

  • Expected result:
    Should retain folder structure

  • Will the steps above reproduce in a fresh profile? If not what other info can be added?
    Yes

  • Is this an issue in the currently released version?
    Need to verify but could be a regressed issue

  • Can this issue be consistently reproduced?
    Yes

  • Extra QA steps:
    1.
    2.
    3.

  • Screenshot if needed:
    Pyramid 0 after sync
    image
    Pyramid 1 after sync
    image

  • Any related issues:

@bsclifton
Copy link
Member

Closing; this is a dupe of #8454

@bsclifton bsclifton added the duplicate Issue has already been reported label May 31, 2017
@luixxiul luixxiul removed the needs-investigation A bug not 100% confirmed/fixed that needs QA to better audit. label Oct 30, 2017
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants