On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 11:48:17 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 05:36:13PM +0200, Tino Keitel wrote: > > > I agree that the latest isync is loads better than the old one, and so > > > if things don't work maybe we just tell people in the NEWS file that > > > it's an incompatible upgrade, and that things will just break, or > > > maybe we create a new mbsync package and tell people that they have to > > > explicit upgrade to the mbsync package and be ready to deal with any > > > compatibility issues that might exist. > > > > I think that a smooth upgrade without user interaction is desireable > > here. > > I agree, that would definitely be best. What is clearly unacceptable > is if things break and users aren't warned about it in advance, with a > chance to abort the upgrade if they're not ready. (I've had some > really lousy failure modes where isync's ID mapping database is > corrupted, or the IMAP server's namespace changes, and I'm travelling > overseas in a location with lousy/high ping times, and am forced to > throw away the isync replicated mailbox and synchronize thousands of > messages and hudreds of megabytes of data over a slow/high latency > network link. It can highly annoying at best, and extremely costly or > completely impossible to get new mail at worst.)
Hi, isync 1.0.3 is available on <http://sourceforge.net/projects/isync>, with all upgrade issues that I spotted sorted out. I hope that this version will make it into Etch. Regards, Tino -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
