On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 21:06 +0100, Lukas Zeller wrote: > Hello Patrick, > > On Sep 22, 2009, at 17:45 , Patrick Ohly wrote: > > > Hello Lukas! > > > > Thanks a lot! Now we just need to figure out how to enable > > "lenientMode" > > for specific servers in SyncEvolution. > > > > On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 18:02 +0100, Lukas Zeller wrote: > >> Both legacyMode and lenientMode now have a corresponding tag for use > >> in <remoterule>, so the modes can be configured on a per-client base > >> in servers. > > > > You probably would have mentioned it, but... can remote rules also be > > enabled in a client on a per-server basis? > > Probably, but I never tested that. I thought you tried something in > this area a while ago?
I'm using remote rules in the PARSE/MAKETEXTWITHPROFILE() macros, but they are not enabled via matching against DevInf. > It might also be too late as the client would need a devInf result > BEFORE it gets the Alert status, which probably is not always the case. True. > Anyway, enabling lenientMode can be done setting a flag in the / > profiles/xxxx key: in the value "profileFlags" set bit 2 > (PROFILEFLAG_LENIENTMODE). This is exactly the same way as legacy mode > works (PROFILEFLAG_LEGACYMODE). I thought this would simple become a > parameter for those preconfigured servers which need it (ZYB for now). That's the fallback. I was just wondering whether we can avoid yet another SyncEvolution peer config setting, in particular one which will remain set across updates of SyncEvolution. -- 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. _______________________________________________ os-libsynthesis mailing list [email protected] http://lists.synthesis.ch/mailman/listinfo/os-libsynthesis
