You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
A conflict cannot be reviewed safely from filenames or raw metadata alone. Users need enough visual and contextual evidence to distinguish the local and remote versions, understand what changed, and choose a non-destructive resolution.
Acceptance criteria
Conflict rows show bounded local and remote previews when available, with clear placeholders for unsupported, missing, permission-limited, cloud-only, RAW, and video content.
The detail view presents local and remote size, modified time, content type, checksum or ETag evidence when available, account/destination context, and the operation that produced the conflict.
Users can choose local, remote, keep both, propagate deletion, restore, or skip only when the operation is valid for that conflict type.
Keep both produces a deterministic non-colliding name and preserves both originals.
Replace and deletion choices use verified preconditions and never silently overwrite a version that changed during review.
Preview decoding and fetching are bounded, cancellable, cached by version identity, and never block the paged conflict list.
Transfer Center, Sync status, notifications, and file detail surfaces deep-link to the same authoritative conflict record.
Resolutions survive process death, expose progress and failure recovery, and re-read authoritative state before marking the conflict complete.
Tests cover identical-looking files, same-name different-content files, RAW/JPEG and Live Photo pairs, videos, cloud-only media, permission loss, stale ETags, deletion conflicts, and ambiguous network results.
Roadmap
SYNC-009P0Problem
A conflict cannot be reviewed safely from filenames or raw metadata alone. Users need enough visual and contextual evidence to distinguish the local and remote versions, understand what changed, and choose a non-destructive resolution.
Acceptance criteria