Hi Armin, thanks for answering. > the syncengine itself already has almost all the functionality of 0.8X > (and even more on some parts). The only things that missing is to make > the gui fully working again (ie connect the selectors for the object > types to synchronize, filters etc) and the plugins. Another thing that > should be done is to implement a new gui that takes advantage of the new > features of opensync (it can display the progress for example, allow > syncgroups etc). I thought about implementing the new gui in qt4 so we > can use the same gui for linux, windows and mac.
Ok; I would probably focus on replicating the current functionality as much as possible, just for stability purposes (but my opinion doesn't really count, at least not until I jump in and help out). > >* when each connector should become available for 0.9. > > > thats a tough question :) > the next plugin that should get finished is the syncml plugin. the other > plugins are "wid" since either the original authors of the plugins have > to port them or someone has to pick up. Hum... "wid" == "when it's done"? Anyway, here I could probably try and help (GUIs are not my strong suit anyway); is there any documentation for how to write or port a plugin? Is there a "dummy" plugin that one can base a design on? > >* when multisync will be released as 1.0 (although I may not care much > >about that, it could be important because of marketing reasons). > > > once we have a useable gui and the plugins ported i would say. > > my roadmap idea was like this: > > beta: current status + syncml plugin finished + old gui ported 100% agree, this points the way to replicating current "published" functionality on a strong and well designed foundation. > 0.90: current status + syncml plugin finished and everything tested + > old gui ported Ok, so this is basically "go through the beta testing process". > 1.0: all plugins + fully working gui Ok, (my) emphasis on all plugins; what do you exactly mean with "fully working gui"? > people should not have to use the gui we design but should be able to > implement opensync into their application, but with complete access to > all plugins and configured groups. > > but i dont know if there are such plans already in the evolution camp. Ok, great, so I did get the idea here. Maybe it would help multisync if someone could take the time and explain these issues on the web page: what the plans are, why, what the shortcomings were on the old (current) version, what is getting fixed in the new version, what is already done, what is missing, what are some rough dates for each target, etc. It took me a while, after I had subscribed to this list, to understand there existed such a thing as opensync and there were plans for a complete revamping; maybe you could attract more help by better publicizing the plans. These are my honest thoughts; I hope they are not taken as criticism or complaints, they are not. Thanks for all the hard effort, and best regards. -- Gonzalo Diethelm [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Multisync-users mailing list Multisync-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/multisync-users
