OK. Let me introduce myself now. I am the architect for Buteo Sync solution and the maintainer for it in MeeGo and I work for Nokia.
My comments inline > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Patrick Ohly [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 19 August, 2010 16:45 > To: Yves-Alexis Perez > Cc: [email protected]; Kavuri Sateesh (Nokia-MS/Bangalore); Ouyang Qi > (Nokia-MS/Helsinki); Gerasimenko Sergey (Nokia-MS/Helsinki); > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MeeGo-dev] Buteo / data synchronization in MeeGo: hello world! > > Hello! > > Please remember to do group replying, at least for Buteo. Thanks! Hmm, I > just noticed that the copy of the email received via the mailing list > does not show all people that I originally had on CC, which defeats the > whole idea. Trying again, this time without full names... > > On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 10:10 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > > Out of curiosity, why a new project instead of reusing SyncEvolution > > (and adding the missing features?) > > I suppose Nokia didn't know about it when they started with Buteo. Once > this was discussed, it was too late to change direction under the given > constraints (staffing, time frame for the next release, etc.). But this > is becoming off-topic, let's focus on technical questions here. [SK] Yes, that’s true. When Buteo was started, it is expected to be a Nokia only solution and none of the open source solutions satisfied our requirements (licensing also played some role here) > > > In the wiki page, one can see: > > > * Device to device synchronization of PIM data (Contacts and Calendar > for now) based on SyncML > > > * Device to cloud synchronization of PIM data (ovi.com, > Scheduleworld.com etc.) based on SyncML > > > * Synchronization of media content to PC based on MTP > > > * Device to PC synchronization (currently only OviSuite, but this > requires contract with OviSuite to support a particular device) > > > > Why no “device to PC” using SyncML over bluetooth? It's quite > > convenient, especially since OviSuite isn't usable for a lot of people > > and since “device to device” seems already possible I guess it's just a > > special case with “device is a PC”. [SK] The device to PC solution could be implemented and is part of the MeeGo netbook roadmap. So, the idea is to synchronize MeeGo device data with a MeeGo netbook. The next step would be to support a Linux desktop sync solution. For Windows, there is already OviSuite and it does not make sense that create a new solution, given that it takes quite some effort to create a new Windows desktop sync solution. > > Yes. > > But beware, the Wiki page describes the Buteo design, not the current > implementation or how it is used in a product. Right now, device to > MeeGo device synchronization is not possible with the available code > because there is no code which hooks up Buteo with incoming > OBEX/Bluetooth connections (feature request pending, > http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3868). [SK] Yes, there is already a request to implement this feature for MeeGo and hopefully we will bring it out by MeeGo 1.1 timeframe > > > (and I do hope that not just one calendar will be syncable, as it's the > > case on N900/Fremantle) [SK] The concept around multiple calendars in N900 (or anywhere) is that the end-user differentiates the various calendars (work, personal, google etc.) and would not want the data to be mixed up. For example, one would not want to mix the work events with the personal and expect them to endup in google server. So, choosing just 1 calendar to sync at a time is reasonable. > > This is problematic with SyncML, because most servers and devices only > support one calendar. SyncEvolution can be configured to synchronize > more than one calendar per sync session, both in the client and server > mode. ScheduleWorld has a sync URL hack where different calendars can be > selected by configuring ScheduleWorld multiple times and running > different sessions. > > Regarding Buteo, this has two aspects: can it be done with the code (on > topic for this list), and will it be supported by products (off-topic). > I guess it should work technically, but is probably untested and there > might be some corner cases to take care of (there's a locking mechanism > for "calendar" data, and I don't know whether a sync session may get > that lock twice for two different databases or has to ensure that it > only asks once). [SK] From MeeGo point of view, all the calendars use the same backend database. So, there is no special locking mechanism to work two calendars. But like I mentioned, this case should not arise since the user would want to separate the calendars > > -- > Best Regards, Patrick Ohly > > The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although > I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way > represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak > on behalf of Intel on this matter. > [SK] Best regards, Sateesh Kavuri _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
