Re: [Opensync-devel] Getting things back on track

[Patrick O. <pat...@gm...>]

On Tue, 2009-10-20 at 09:55 +0200, Bjoern Ricks wrote:
> But as a developer of opensync I
> can say that our framework supports (nearly) all use cases already.

Do you support the use cases theoretically or in practice? My
understanding is that "vCard 2.1 (phone) <=> vCard 3.0 (Evolution)" does
not work. Nor does vCalendar <=> iCalendar. In my opinion the "future
proofness" of OpenSync is mostly theoretical at this point. I'd be happy
to be proven wrong, of course.

>  I
> don't think that SyncEvolution can handle different capabilities. 

This is incorrect. Please have a look at
http://syncevolution.org/development/pim-data-synchronization-why-it-so-hard

It explains how the Synthesis engine uses capabilities to determine
which properties are supported by a peer and how it generates that
information automatically from the data format description. In contrast
to other SyncML libraries, this intelligence is also available in
clients, thus allowing a "smart" client to merge updates from a "dumber"
server.

For data source developers there's no need to do anything manually to
use and support capabilities, in contrast to OpenSync and the Funambol
client library.

-- 
Bye, Patrick Ohly
--  
Pat...@gm...
http://www.estamos.de/