Seafile pro edition 7.0.1 is ready for testing. Now Seafile can be used for knowledge management!

Well, it’s not really missing. You just have to pay for it. Which I think is fair enough.

We have just re-implemented the sharing link feature. The download-upload link feature will be added later.

The download icon is still there. It is just covered by the context menu in the screenshot.

It depends on how many people need this feature.

1 Like

This is a must have for the CE. Users left Seafile because it misses this basic feature.
This is a community and we can continue asking for this basic feature, some day they might enable the CE with a basic search.

1 Like

Not for a basic feature that is available in all other community versions of similar software.

1 Like

Well, maybe I’m the wrong target audience but users in my university would barely use something like Google Docs or Dropbox Papers to write scientific papers. I know that Micro$oft is pushing all their Users to their Office365 cloud but I hope it is just a question of time users recognize what a vendor-lockin is and what it means to need an internet connection to write a thesis.

Even the Seafile Wiki would be a real Wiki like MediaWiki (not just Library with a bunch of markdown files) I would always advice against it because it is rarely a good idea to use the same tool for different tasks.

Don’t understand me wrong: I love Seafile because it does a great job in syncing files but there are dozens of other features missing related to this core feature of Seafile:

btw: Missing file search is real a show stopper (I can not count the amount of users who could use Seafile CE but don’t use it because of the missing file search feature).

I understand that you want to nudge users to the pro edition (I would love to pay for it if it would be fully FLOSS) but maybe you should reconsider your financing model. Proxmox for example (a nice SOHO hypervisor software) is fully FLOSS and the devs earn money by different subscription plans for stable upgrades and official support:

  • License without charge: No official support (just by other users) and updates/patches only via beta repository
  • Cheapest license: Access to stable updates/patches repo and forum support
  • More expensive licenses: 3 support tickets/year up to unlimited support tickets.

For Seafile this could be:

  • License without charge: No official support (just by other users) and updates/patches only via beta repository
  • 1€/month: Access to stable repository (imagine how many users there are using the CE edition who would like to see a stable funding but want to stay with the FLOSS version of Seafile) but no official support in the community forum
  • 5€/month: Access to stable repo and official support in the community forum
  • More expensive licenses: Support tickets via email

This way you could drop the CE / Pro separation and earn money without using vendor-lockin techniques (the company behind Proxmox is very successfull in this way because users don’t have the feeling to be dependent of this company).

Yes, this maybe would cause some trouble with users who already bought the Pro license but I think even the Pro users would like to see more a more progressive development of Seafile (for the core features I listed above and the feature you think Seafile has to offer - for both it is not a bad idea to have more money for more developers).

However: Thanks for Seafile!


I also think the Wiki is more a Add-In feature than nessecary and Dev Team schould concentrate on the WebUI, Clients and Seadrive. There is still much to improve.


I fully support this and this:

Dev Team schould concentrate on the WebUI, Clients and Seadrive.

Client cannot create download link with PW and expiry.
For so much stuff I need to go into the WebInterface, that’s so annoying.

I’m missing a proper solution to keep file in sync on my phone 2-way like dropsync does (without Webdav)

I dont care about WIKI, maybe others do. I dont use Google-Docs or Dropbox-Paper. Maybe other do.
For me no need to upgrade to 7 pro atm.

For me it seems that the development is drivin be one big customer and what “he” needs or the development is driven by what the developers need them selves to organize there work.



Hi Daniel, thanks for the work

in the upgrade for me, 1 warning… (6.3 to 7.0):

 [WARNING] Failed to execute sql: (1091, "Can't DROP 'profile_profile_contact_email_0975e4bf_uniq'; check that column/key exists")

Are you any idea ?.

1 Like

This is just a warning. It is because some old version does not created an index.
It can be ignored.

I have thoroughly tested Seafile 7.0.1 over the long Easter weekend. 7.0.1 is not quite production ready yet and needs some more polishing here and there, but I really like the new features and the modern look of Seahub! The new React-based Seahub is sleek and the column view/context menu facilitates file management a lot, the MD editor works well - though there are still some issues when handling images - and the many incremental improvements such as favorites on library level, file tagging, sharing permissions are a strong package.

I do not share the strong criticism by the previous speakers. I shake my head over the renewed call to make a search function part of CE given that this has been discussed at length and “ruled upon” …

… but I would also like to see Seafile’s central sync & share features strengthened going forward. This is what users expect from Seafile and it is what Pro customers pay money for.

My top 5 of things I would like to see implemented are:

  • Add auto expiration to upload links
  • Enable library transfers from users to departments and vice versa
  • Make sync & drive client customizable
  • Fix (permanently) automatic client update
  • Fix file locking in SeaDrive for Office 2016 and younger

MySQL Community Server 8.0.15 Has it been supported?

Thanks for improving Seafile
I’ve tested the latest Beta and found the following issues:

1.) the new Web frontend code seems to be much slower than the old code, mainly if you have large amount of files in 1 folder (I’ve tested a folder with > 2’000 pictures and scrolling became almost impossible, CPU load went up) - in general navigating through the new UI is slower in my opinion (tested with Google Chrome)
-> hope you can improve this, maybe it’s the fault of new libraries… but from a user perspective it’s sad if somethign gets slower in a new version
Please test a folder with lots of files, especially pictures and you will see
Please test in general the performance (automated testing) compared to previous v6.x version before release

2.) Setting read-only and read-write permissions seems to have vanished
I could not figure out how to set them as I could in the latest v6.x version. Maybe you just forgot to add the dialog box… The Client still sees the read-only and read-write difference.
Fine grained folder permissions are important and set the software apart from other solutions - don’t kill this feature.
It would even be great to not only have read-only, read-write but also “no access”


PS: please have a Look at post 8824 too regarding an issue with Seafile Client and read-only libraries/Folders
-> Category Seafile Client


+1 :+1: Yes that would be great

I agree. This would be a nice feat.

The developers have tried to add an “invisible” and “no access” permissions. Yet it seems to be difficult to implement and have thus abandoned the idea - for the time being as I understood.

If Seafile was otherwise flawless and feature-saturated, I would agree that this should be a priority. But - imho - I would invest my priorities elsewhere.

I can live with this limitation for now (even though Nextcloud that we tested as well has it implemented)
With tags you can block users to access folders on various different rules.
If the have no access, the client simply wont sync - the subfolder(s) are then simply not present to these users.

But Seafile has a much better sync between Desktop and Server, that’s a big plus and Seafile can do fine grained folder permissions, which is also great.
Nevertheless, there is one topic with read-only folders that I think needs to be addressed.

Pagination for large folders will be added back in the next release.

The fine-grained folder permissions will be added back too.

great, thanks

maybe go for “infinite scroll” ?
(just an idea)

Yes, the correct term is “infinite scroll”.

with growing size the backend server should also scale up to multiple nodes and distribute its tasks over several nodes.