On Tue, 2004-03-02 at 01:40, Not Zed wrote: > On Mon, 2004-03-01 at 23:56 -0500, JP Rosevear wrote: > > > On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 04:19, Not Zed wrote: > > > In response to my mail on evolution@, someone suggested we make a syncml > > > based interface so that others could write the importers (?more? > > > easily?). I guess that could be an idea, if it can support enough info > > > anyway (accounts, filters?, folders, etc), although the overhead of > > > going through XML would be extremely prohibitive for mailboxes - there > > > can be a LOT of data to import, and it can be slow enough going fd- > > > >memory->fd as it is. Maybe another future bounty though? > > > > The problem with syncml (at least last time i checked) is that it is not > > guaranteed patent free and its controlled by a consortium. We could > > Ahh joy. Now i know a reason to reject it at least, apart from 'it > sounds like a stupid idea, and the name sucks too'. :)
Third page of: http://www.openmobilealliance.org/syncml/docs/syncml_sync_protocol_v11_20020215.pdf Perhaps this is just a standard disclaimer and we need a legal opinion. > > re-investigate that i guess. > > I guess if they really want it, a plugin is a possibility. Yep. -JP -- JP Rosevear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ximian, Inc. _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
