11

It would be great to have an event driven widget that can be triggered by a variety of events, such as 'no content' 'some content' 'named file present', 'a schedule', 'file reaches a certain size' and so on. The settings for such a widget would allow it to use a transfer protocol of the user's choosing to transfer content to a target. The obvious protocols might be FTP, SCP (SSH), MQ, Bit Torrent and no-doubt more. The widget would need to have a success log, an in-progress log and a failed log but success would be apparent when the file disappeared from the widget. The target and protocol settings will be available to set. The widget should also allow users to drop files onto it &/or enable it to monitor one or more existing folders. This could grow to be even more sophisticated but for home users, this much would allow users to, for example upload their photos to their web based print company without relying on the printer's website's dodgy ActiveX transfer app.
(large files that are often updated might require file locking)

Noh.Way

So this is essentially a filebin plasmoid with your own remote location being set?

If so, can you not just create a new folder view with a network location being set as the default, then drag it onto there?

And so much more...
I'm not sure I'm able to set up a remote FTP network location. What I'm proposing is user task based, namely; get my file to the location represented by this plasmoid/folder, rather than protocol based (this is a mounted remote fs plasmoid, this is an FTP plasmoid, this is a SCP plasmoid, this is an MQ plasmoid, etc.

I also mention it being event triggered, with a rich set of events available.

The nearest I've got to this is placing a folder view plasmoid, called PhotoBox on my mum's desktop and have cron run a script every 10 minutes to FTP any jpg or JPG files to photobox, and move the local files to a 'success' folder

How about this? http://kde-apps.org/content/show.php/Ma ... ent=100348

I don't believe that addresses the problem either. Even if it supported the multi-protocol file transfer, which it doesn't, I can't conceive of any rules that could differentiate files based on users' intentions for files of the same nominal type.