Hi,
libsyncml is actually a difficult thing for me. There are five issues
which influence my actual "non-behaviour":
1. The design/quality of libsyncml
2. The man power behind libsyncml
3. The situation in the Open Source scene
4. Active Sync
5. Time
1.) Libsyncml was not designed by me and there is no up-to-date design
documentation. The basic design idea to make things parallel is very
good but the first thing which should be designed is the API. The
problem is that the robustness of libsyncml depends in the past one the
behaviour of the API consumer which must understand the SyncML protocol
details very well.
I tried to fix this by introduction the DS API but this is more a bug
fix for a design problem. So we have in fact two APIs which makes the
library not more robust.
I write here as programmer and not as a manager. So libsyncml is no fun.
The basic ideas are good but we need a second try to get a future ready,
robust library. Even the heavily optimized 0.6.0 in svn is just a fix in
my eyes.
2.) Libsyncml and even SyncML is complicated. The basic design is not
documented. So it is very difficult to find people who want to maintain
it. A library like libsyncml needs at minimum 2-3 developers which
understand it. Otherwise it is not ready for the future. Actually there
is just one pseudo maintainer.
3.) There are two SyncML client implementations available as C libraries
- libsynthesis and libsyncml. I know the guys behind libsynthesis and
there is definitely more manpower and motivation behind the maintenance
especially because libsynthesis is the base for a commercial product.
4.) My university will use Active Sync in the future. I do not want to
discuss here why we come to this decision. The result is that I have now
only a private motivation to get a working SyncML library.
5.) I have no time any longer to work on the library during my job
because I changed the position.
The summary is that I will no longer maintain libsyncml. I can provide a
potential new developer with all requested informations. I personally
would prefer an adaption of libsynthesis to OpenSync because this would
cut the costs in terms of man power. Nevertheless it is noteworthy that
libsynthesis has no OBEX support today.
Best regards
Michael
--
___________________________________________________________________
Michael Bell Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin
Tel.: +49 (0)30-2093 70143 ZE Computer- und Medienservice
Fax: +49 (0)30-2093 2704 Unter den Linden 6
mic...@cm... D-10099 Berlin
___________________________________________________________________
PGP Fingerprint: 09E4 3D29 4156 2774 0F2C C643 D8BD 1918 2030 5AAB
|
