Can a share two different projects with someone else

Is it possible to share two projects? If so how do you scan the second code?

At the moment end user can have only 1 shared project.

1 Like

Thanks. Cant wait for more :+1:

@Dmitriy I’m sorry for bumping an old thread but from the forum guidelines I understood finding an existing topic would be preferable to submitting a new one.

I would like to ask if this a limitation by business decision or a technical one? If it’s a technical one are there any plans of overcoming the limit?

I’ve found the read-only sharing one of the best features of the app but I’m feeling quite limited with only being able to share a single project to someone at once.

Why this is limiting for me is that I’m currently sharing two projects. A home automation project shared with my gf and another one with my family for things related to our shared summer cottage. Now if I would want to share the cottage project also to my gf it would be too cumbersome. Similarly I would like to setup a simple home automation project for my elderly parents but cannot do that as it’d lock them out of the (more practical) cottage project.

Cloning the projects is not an option as I need everyone to have an up to date version of each project. I cannot combine the projects either as the home automation projects aren’t something to share with the whole family. And as this is just something to share with the family would not make any sense to get a business license to make full fledged applications for this purpose even if I had too much money to spend.

For the possible comments on this - I am aware there are Android apps to create clones/sandboxes of apps but that would definately be overkill in this case. Besides there’s iPhones in the equation.


Well, current sharing was implemented as quick fix / workaround. And right now this is just 1 use case of much larger feature - permissions and user management. The main problem here is money. There is nothing complex here to implement. However, current money flow is not enough to move our efforts into this direction.

So, we will definitely introduce permissions/user management at some point (probably at the time when web version will be introduced), however, most probably, this will be a subsciption based feature.

Understandable. Would the subscription based feature be also available for local server users such as myself?

I don’t think so.

Of course I didn’t mean for free but for the subscription. I can see it would be challenging to add a subscription based feature to bundle with the open source server though. Perhaps it could be implemented as a separate closed source module with cloud based verification like on so many desktop application these days?

Sadly it sounds like I need to look into some alternatives for this particular purpose for now. I’d much rather buy it as a local Blynk server module or a subscription though.

I can see how the current $1 project sharing cost for cloud is not enough to create an incentive to improve the existing functionality. I’d easily pay few hundred euros for such a feature as a single purchase or a monthly subscription reaching similar sums in a couple of years. With that said I’m guessing this would be such a niche feature there would not be enough others to make it worthwhile.

We’ll see. Let’s wait for the web version. We are startup - so changing things is usual thing :slight_smile:.

1 Like

Later on yesterday I got thinking about different ways I could approach creating a workaround to solve my problem.

I am a developer myself but since the Blynk app is not open source I cannot do anything on that side of course. Then I thought about the option of building a custom mobile web app to interface with the Blynk server REST API (or directly with Node-RED which is the only thing acting as “devices” on my Blynk setup. That could work but I am not very good at making things pretty and the result would probably not make pass my personal expectations of quality.

Then I started thinking if it would be possible to fork the blynk-server repo and do some ugly hack to solve this. Something like displaying my selected projects as projects of another users but forcing a non-editable view of the project. Ideally using the mode used by the shared project access but if decided when to show that is more on the app side, then just discard all the edits done by the user viewing the “shared” project.

I wonder if this would be possible on a theoretical level or would it be breaking the server code license? This theoretical hack would be for personal use only of course. I’m saying on a theoretical level since even though I am a Java developer, I have no idea how much work would this actually be or if I had the necessary skills for the task. :slight_smile:

No, if you open-source your fork.

This actually could be very easily done with “hacks”. But yeag, you have to know how server works for that :slight_smile:

No, if it will be open-sourced.

Naturally I’d just fork the repo on GitHub. I’ll need to investigate this. Interesting. :slight_smile: