Fully agree with DerDanilo
+1. Amen, brother. Basic features like Search help sell the solution.
I would also like to see folders added to Favorites for the same reason. It helps people navigate the system and contributes to work flow, especially for use in collaborative projects.
Can you please reconsider? We donât need full text search capabilities in CE, just search by file name!
Surely this can be added without the feeling of there being too many free features in the CE version.
2 Likes
+1 DerDanilo
Hi,
Considering the economic model of a Software company like Seafile Ltd and the availability of Seafile Pro, it is quite normal that CE version has limitated features, because - basically - it is free of charge.
Then, discussions between users and devs about what kind of features can be omitted or not in CE is very Important and may lead to a common view.
As a public institution, we payed fo Pro version because we needed full functionalities but also to support the efforts of the open source model.
We have less that 2 000 users, wich is acceptable for pro version.
Iâ like to start another discussion in the forum.
I understand that some hosting companies use seafile in CE version and redistribute the service (hosting + sofwtare) as a paid service.
I donât know of they are a lot, but iâm quite sure they are.
Their economic model do not support the development of the software, wich is a pity.
There may be an intermediate solution for this case.
As they get benefit for the features, they may pay (a little) for them.
Business is business 
Regards,
Gautier
6 Likes
What about recurring crowdfunding for the search option in CE?
Could work like this: If the Community does not donate an amount of X$/whatever the option is not available in the next client release. Means: Whenever the community donates enough the next version has the option and otherwise not.
3 Likes
Good Idea! +1
Yes!
If the bug reporting and beta testing we as a community do for the developers isnât enough âeconomic valueâ to get a basic file search added to the community edition (which by the way is the source that feeds their pro version), perhaps bribing them with cash will do it 
They may loose a big part of this community one day. I think that Seafiles development might be picked up by someone else one day. It is nice software but denying basic (other similar software) features for the pure purpose of keeping them locked for their proprietary version is their right but also not nice to the community that submits a lot, leading to a better software in the end.
Whatâs about forking? If we built file search into the community edition they will accept it.
I am not sure that they would actually accept it.
I wouldnât pay for this either. Letâs not get into how much time a lot of professionals spend on their free time for Seafile. If they world start billing for their input they would be rich. (Though Seafile couldnât or at least wouldnât pay them for it).
Please write me a PM regarding forking.
Hi all,
Please remember the past dispute before Seafile GMBH and seafile Ltd before considering forking.
I wontâ support that for my own.
I think that such a feature will be added in the future, please be patient.
âDo you have the patience to wait
Till your mud settles and the water is clear?
Can you remain unmoving
Till the right action arises by itself?ââ Lao Tzu
Regards
No worries, I donât have time for that. At least not currently.
2 Likes
Letâs push for basic file search capability to be added to 7.0!
Come on @daniel.pan, I know yâall can do this. Itâs a very basic feature that has been missing for way too long!
If Nextcloud, Pydio, and others can offer this, why would you not want to be feature compatible?
2 Likes
Thanks, edited. 7.0 sounds like a good version for this too
Basic File name search is indeed needed.
Seeing that thereâs a database storing the files that database should have an âobjectnameâ field so could someone write write a Database (SQL) query to search the tables for filename and wrap it into the web GUI?
Wouldnât it be as simple as
Select LibraryName, FolderName, FileName where FileName where FileName = [user input string}
???
Just had another reply added to the file search request on github . Adding it here for tracking:
We just found out there is no file search function on the community version, like seriously? This is basic functionality on EVERY cloud storage solution, so if we are trying to get people off Dropbox and told them they cannot search through their files, they laugh at me. We are not asking for in text search, just search library for file
Come on @daniel.pan and company, reconsider please!
Interesting that this is so important for some, I donât miss this feature at all. I can search the synchronized files with operating system tools and the rest I have agreed a clear structure with my team, so that all documents can still be found quickly. It is important to follow the seven folder rules: never create more than seven folders on the top level, otherwise it is difficult to keep track of them.
Yeah this is nice. But customer demand overrules the best advise. (Unfortunately)
And one has not always access to a local machine and wonât have all libraries synchronized. Especially in organisations you usually donât sync everything you have access to.