Hi Patrick, glad to hear such good news from you - really appreciate your work. I am actively using SyncEvolution on Debian Buster with TDE and with Sailfish OS phone.
I was wondering about openobex-1.7 (aka libopenobex2) - is it possible to get it working with it? It seems to be the new default in debian, but is not working with SyncEvolution and you did not mention it. Thank you BR On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 9:38 PM Patrick Ohly <patrick.o...@intel.com> wrote: > [Most of the text below was written in December 2019, but than > unintentionally sent to an internal mailing list - no surprise that I > never got any response!] > > Hello! > > Over the Christmas holidays I worked on building a new SyncEvolution > release. My > current goal is to build for Ubuntu Bionic (most > recent LTS) and support those binaries on all more recent Debian and > Ubuntu releases. > > If possible, I'd like to drop unused features if they require extra > effort. This mostly depends if someone still needs them. Let me list > some features that I'd like to remove. If you still need them, please > respond here: > > * At the top of that list is ActiveSync support. activesyncd no longer > builds on Debian Stretch because it depends on libgnome-keyring, which > was removed. It probably can be ported to libsecret, but that's > extra work. > > * x86 (i.e. 32 bit) binaries - it doubles the testing effort. > > * RPMs - they never had proper dependencies and I am not sure whether > they ever worked at all. > > * Akonadi support and KDE in general. > > I first encountered problem with Akonadi in Debian Stretch and reported > it here with a stand-alone reproducer: > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=369203 > > But as pointed out in that issue, the API that SyncEvolution uses is no > longer supported and thus SyncEvolution would have to be ported to the > current API, whatever that is - I haven't investigated that. > > * Port to Python 3 and stop supporting Python 2. > > Regarding the source code, I'd like merge all pending patches. This > obviously includes all the changes that are required to build on more > recent Linux distros, but also the C++ modernization that I started a > while back. > > The result will be more than just a simple bug fix release, but also not > something that has any new user-visible features. I'm not entirely happy > with that, but I also don't want to be stuck completely in pure > maintenance mode. > > I got testing on the newer Linux distros working with the updated code > base already beginning of this year, but then got stuck because of a > regression and lack of time to dig into that. Since then, the apt repo > keys expired and I haven't renewed them because the binaries probably > wouldn't work anyway. > > I suppose users would like to see binaries again, primarily because > SyncEvolution fell out of Debian/Ubuntu? > > -- > Best Regards > > Patrick Ohly > _______________________________________________ > SyncEvolution mailing list -- syncevolution@syncevolution.org > To unsubscribe send an email to syncevolution-le...@syncevolution.org > %(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s >
_______________________________________________ SyncEvolution mailing list -- syncevolution@syncevolution.org To unsubscribe send an email to syncevolution-le...@syncevolution.org %(web_page_url)slistinfo%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s
