Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On 2012-03-20 23:40, Donny Brooks wrote: On Tuesday, March 20, 2012 04:09 PM CDT, mayak-cq wrote: > > > well -- secret be told -- it is being worked on and i am partially > > funding the development > > > > i'll let francois give the details. > this is really great news! Thanks a lot for supporting this development! > Is synchronization of multiple address books going to be possible via z-push? hi heiner, i may be mistaken, but i don't think so. activesync doesn't support it. perhaps someone else can confirm. idea is currently to develop a carddav/caldav backend for z-push with ldap auth -- *perhaps* something could be done on the caldav server side to combine books. thanks m -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists We use the current z-push for our iDevices and androids for email (but not calendar since the CalDAVSync-Beta program on android and native iOS caldav both work beautifully). I am just looking for a working ActiveSync frontend that will work with our iOS 5.XX users to get their email. Should the implementation of z-push for SOGo work with this or are you just trying to get an activesync compatible caldav/carddav sync? -- Donny B. You can use z-push to only support EMAIL. it is just a matter of configuration (ie: not using combined backend) additional backend are not mandatory. -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On 2012-03-20 23:09, mayak-cq wrote: well -- secret be told -- it is being worked on and i am partially funding the development i'll let francois give the details. this is really great news! Thanks a lot for supporting this development! Is synchronization of multiple address books going to be possible via z-push? hi heiner, i may be mistaken, but i don't think so. activesync doesn't support it. perhaps someone else can confirm. idea is currently to develop a carddav/caldav backend for z-push with ldap auth -- *perhaps* something could be done on the caldav server side to combine books. thanks m Activesync does support multiple addressbook as well as calendar. However the client might not support it. On iOS it is working fine. -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am Tuesday 20 March 2012 22:09:30 schrieb mayak-cq: > > > > > > > > well -- secret be told -- it is being worked on and i am partially > > > funding the development > > > > > > i'll let francois give the details. > > > > > this is really great news! Thanks a lot for supporting this development! > > Is synchronization of multiple address books going to be possible via > > z-push? > > > > hi heiner, > > i may be mistaken, but i don't think so. activesync doesn't support it. > > perhaps someone else can confirm. idea is currently to develop a > carddav/caldav backend for z-push with ldap auth -- *perhaps* something > could be done on the caldav server side to combine books. > > thanks > > m > Hi, have a look at the z-push backend developed for the kolab server [1] for an example of both points you mentioned: a) they support so called "folder mode", synchronizing multiple calendars and address books to compatible (according to their wiki, currently only Apple) devices. This means that multiple calendars/address books are not merged into one but instead are being kept as multiple calendar/address book folders on the mobile. This also means that the active sync protocol supports multiple folders. b) What I was originally thinking about when I asked the question was merging several calendars or address books on the server side into one on the mobile/client side, similar to how it is being done in sogo for funambol syncml-synchronizations for calendars already. A perfect implementation in my point of view would support both modes of operation. This is what is currently available for the kolab server. Best regards Heiner [1] http://wiki.kolab.org/index.php/Z_push -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On Tuesday, March 20, 2012 04:09 PM CDT, mayak-cq wrote: > > > > well -- secret be told -- it is being worked on and i am partially > > funding the development > > > > i'll let francois give the details. > this is really great news! Thanks a lot for supporting this development! > Is synchronization of multiple address books going to be possible via z-push? hi heiner, i may be mistaken, but i don't think so. activesync doesn't support it. perhaps someone else can confirm. idea is currently to develop a carddav/caldav backend for z-push with ldap auth -- *perhaps* something could be done on the caldav server side to combine books. thanks m -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists We use the current z-push for our iDevices and androids for email (but not calendar since the CalDAVSync-Beta program on android and native iOS caldav both work beautifully). I am just looking for a working ActiveSync frontend that will work with our iOS 5.XX users to get their email. Should the implementation of z-push for SOGo work with this or are you just trying to get an activesync compatible caldav/carddav sync? -- Donny B.
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
> > > > well -- secret be told -- it is being worked on and i am partially > > funding the development > > > > i'll let francois give the details. > this is really great news! Thanks a lot for supporting this development! > Is synchronization of multiple address books going to be possible via z-push? hi heiner, i may be mistaken, but i don't think so. activesync doesn't support it. perhaps someone else can confirm. idea is currently to develop a carddav/caldav backend for z-push with ldap auth -- *perhaps* something could be done on the caldav server side to combine books. thanks m -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am Tuesday 20 March 2012 06:47:31 schrieb mayak-cq: > On Mon, 2012-03-19 at 19:12 -0400, Ludovic Marcotte wrote: > > > On 19/03/12 17:19, chymian wrote: > > > I believe, there a lot of people waiting desperatley for the > > > implementation of z-push. > > > so, it would be nice, if we can get some news on that development for the > > > 1.5.x/2.0 sogo-backend for z-push? > > > > > > when will be a beta/release available? > > AFAIK, no one is working on it so don't expect anything anytime soon. > > hi all, > > well -- secret be told -- it is being worked on and i am partially > funding the development > > i'll let francois give the details. > > thanks > > m > Hi, this is really great news! Thanks a lot for supporting this development! Is synchronization of multiple address books going to be possible via z-push? Best regards Heiner -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On Mon, 2012-03-19 at 19:12 -0400, Ludovic Marcotte wrote: > On 19/03/12 17:19, chymian wrote: > > I believe, there a lot of people waiting desperatley for the implementation > > of z-push. > > so, it would be nice, if we can get some news on that development for the > > 1.5.x/2.0 sogo-backend for z-push? > > > > when will be a beta/release available? > AFAIK, no one is working on it so don't expect anything anytime soon. hi all, well -- secret be told -- it is being worked on and i am partially funding the development i'll let francois give the details. thanks m -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On 19/03/12 17:19, chymian wrote: I believe, there a lot of people waiting desperatley for the implementation of z-push. so, it would be nice, if we can get some news on that development for the 1.5.x/2.0 sogo-backend for z-push? when will be a beta/release available? AFAIK, no one is working on it so don't expect anything anytime soon. -- Ludovic Marcotte +1.514.755.3630 :: www.inverse.ca Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (www.packetfence.org) -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
hi, I believe, there a lot of people waiting desperatley for the implementation of z-push. so, it would be nice, if we can get some news on that development for the 1.5.x/2.0 sogo-backend for z-push? when will be a beta/release available? which functions will it include? if you need tester iphone (ios 4.3.3) & android let me know. cheers chymian Am Mittwoch, 22. Februar 2012, 00:22:49 schrieb Jeroen Dekkers: > At Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:11:43 +0100, > > Corrado Fiore wrote: > > 1) Just to make sure we're all on the same page, what would be the final > > product of your effort? A Z-push backend to be installed onto the > > latest stable release of Z-push? > > > > 2) Would you release your code with a GPL license? > > That's a requirement, because Z-Push is licensed under the > AGPLv3. Even if you run it publicly accessible running you would need > to provide the code. > > > Regards, > > Jeroen Dekkers -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
At Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:11:43 +0100, Corrado Fiore wrote: > 1) Just to make sure we're all on the same page, what would be the final > product of your effort? A Z-push backend to be installed onto the latest > stable release of Z-push? > > 2) Would you release your code with a GPL license? That's a requirement, because Z-Push is licensed under the AGPLv3. Even if you run it publicly accessible running you would need to provide the code. Regards, Jeroen Dekkers -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On Feb 19, 2012, at 21:39 , Lacroix Francois wrote: > How are still interest in a Caldav/Carddav support for Z-Push? Yup, definitely. > I would be able to do it for 800€. > I would need to take holiday to be fully concentrate on it. That sounds reasonable to me. > I have only an iPhone to do test but ActiveSync shoud be the same accross OS > as it license. Luckily, I have an Android-powered device, so I could help test it. Some quick questions: 1) Just to make sure we're all on the same page, what would be the final product of your effort? A Z-push backend to be installed onto the latest stable release of Z-push? 2) Would you release your code with a GPL license? Also, even if the amount of money involved is relatively small, I think we should rely on an external fundraising service like Kickstarter (https://www.kickstarter.com/proposals/profiles/new) or something similar (suggestions welcome!). Best, Corrado Fiore-- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Dear All, I second this proposal of developing a SOGo-version of Z-Push. I'd contribute with another 400 Euros. Time to start a fundraising for this? Best, Corrado Fiore __ On Feb 7, 2012, at 15:54 , mayak-cq wrote: > i'm willing to finance 400 euros ... just need an invoice of some sort. -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
i'm willing to finance 400 euros ... just need an invoice of some sort. cheers m -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
At Tue, 07 Feb 2012 08:26:23 +0100, André Schild wrote: > > https://github.com/dekkers/s-push/tree/caldav > Have you taken the 1.5.x branch or the upcomming 2.0 branch ? > Perhaps it would be good to directly go to the 2.x code. This is the 1.5.x branch, but the backend API is (almost) the same, from quick a look I didn't spot much difference. So if it works with 1.5.x, we can quickly move the backend to 2.x. > > The problem is that I guess that 2-3 weeks of development time is > > needed to get two-way syncing of both calendar and contacts working > > and most bugs have been ironed out. I currently don't have the free > > time to do it and don't think there are enough people/companies > > willing to donate money to fund the development (but if you are, speak > > up here or in private, maybe I'm wrong and something like a > > kickstarter crowdfunding of this feature is possible). > > > I could also spend time on that project. Forking on github is very easy, if you have any questions about the code just ask, but I think the code shouldn't be that hard to understand and I tried to comment things that might be. You can download the complete protocol specification from Microsoft. Kind regaders, Jeroen Dekkers -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
At Tue, 07 Feb 2012 09:31:58 +0100, Jim wrote: > > On 7-2-2012 8:26, André Schild wrote: > > I could also spend time on that project. > > > > > > Another sources for active sync informations can be found here > > > > - http://wiki.horde.org/ActiveSync > > It's based on a 1.x version of z-push but then heavily > > refactored/reworked. > > > > - http://code.google.com/p/o-push/ > > A java based active sync server > > A nice option (depending on license, architecture etc) might be to build > something using Syncevolution. As far as I know, syncevolution is a client, not a server. The good thing is that it supports caldav and carddav, so it can easily talk to SOGo. Kind regards, Jeroen Dekkers -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On 7-2-2012 10:48, André Schild wrote: > Am 07.02.2012 09:31, schrieb Jim: >> On 7-2-2012 8:26, André Schild wrote: >>> I could also spend time on that project. >>> >>> >>> Another sources for active sync informations can be found here >>> >>> - http://wiki.horde.org/ActiveSync >>>It's based on a 1.x version of z-push but then heavily >>> refactored/reworked. >>> >>> - http://code.google.com/p/o-push/ >>>A java based active sync server >> A nice option (depending on license, architecture etc) might be to build >> something using Syncevolution. >> >> They have SyncML support built in (and it is very stable; e.g. used in a >> lot of mobile phones), and they're working on ActiveSync support as >> well.. >> >> See e.g. >> http://syncevolution.org/blogs/pohly/2011/syncevolution-12-released > Does this also work in a "multiuser" environment ? > Syncevolition looks like a one user Sync service... I don't know if the entire framework is (haven't developed with it, just a satisfied user). Syncevolution does use a SyncML library (Synthesis, IIRC) that, also IIRC, is also used in a SyncML server... -- Regards, jb -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 07.02.2012 09:31, schrieb Jim: On 7-2-2012 8:26, André Schild wrote: I could also spend time on that project. Another sources for active sync informations can be found here - http://wiki.horde.org/ActiveSync It's based on a 1.x version of z-push but then heavily refactored/reworked. - http://code.google.com/p/o-push/ A java based active sync server A nice option (depending on license, architecture etc) might be to build something using Syncevolution. They have SyncML support built in (and it is very stable; e.g. used in a lot of mobile phones), and they're working on ActiveSync support as well.. See e.g. http://syncevolution.org/blogs/pohly/2011/syncevolution-12-released Does this also work in a "multiuser" environment ? Syncevolition looks like a one user Sync service... I agree that decoupling a sync framework from direct access to the database is the way to go; using standards such as caldav will make it easier to test, and adapt for other projects... +1 André -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On 7-2-2012 8:26, André Schild wrote: > I could also spend time on that project. > > > Another sources for active sync informations can be found here > > - http://wiki.horde.org/ActiveSync > It's based on a 1.x version of z-push but then heavily > refactored/reworked. > > - http://code.google.com/p/o-push/ > A java based active sync server A nice option (depending on license, architecture etc) might be to build something using Syncevolution. They have SyncML support built in (and it is very stable; e.g. used in a lot of mobile phones), and they're working on ActiveSync support as well.. See e.g. http://syncevolution.org/blogs/pohly/2011/syncevolution-12-released I agree that decoupling a sync framework from direct access to the database is the way to go; using standards such as caldav will make it easier to test, and adapt for other projects... -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 07.02.2012 02:39, schrieb Jeroen Dekkers: At Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:16:08 -0500, Ludovic Marcotte wrote: On 18/01/12 01:39, André Schild wrote: There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a link for download. I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. We could also import it on our source repository. We did this a while ago from the connector developed by Philipp Kewisch, but he soon after abandoned its development. One of the problems with the existing SOGo backend is that it uses an old version of Z-Push that has a different license. The old version was GPLv2 only, newer versions are AGPLv3 only. Because the SOGo backend code doesn't have an explicit different license, we can only assume that it's GPLv2 only and can't use this code with newer Z-Push versions. I don't think we want to maintain our own Z-Push fork forever and not be able to use newer Z-Push features. Because of that and that I also read that it was not production quality, I tried to see how hard it would be to implement a new backend (without reading any of the old code of course) that uses caldav-client-2.php from davical to talk to the caldav server. I spend a few days working on it and got as far as that I could sync my calendar items from the server to the phone. I've just pushed the code to github in the case anyone would want to continue with the effort: https://github.com/dekkers/s-push/tree/caldav Have you taken the 1.5.x branch or the upcomming 2.0 branch ? Perhaps it would be good to directly go to the 2.x code. The problem is that I guess that 2-3 weeks of development time is needed to get two-way syncing of both calendar and contacts working and most bugs have been ironed out. I currently don't have the free time to do it and don't think there are enough people/companies willing to donate money to fund the development (but if you are, speak up here or in private, maybe I'm wrong and something like a kickstarter crowdfunding of this feature is possible). I could also spend time on that project. Another sources for active sync informations can be found here - http://wiki.horde.org/ActiveSync It's based on a 1.x version of z-push but then heavily refactored/reworked. - http://code.google.com/p/o-push/ A java based active sync server What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. If you're concerned about patents on ActiveSync then you should also be concerned about the patents on the Exchange-Outlook protocol, because MS also lists quite a lot of patents in that area. At least they have been forced by the European Commission to disclose those patents, so it is possible to check whether any patents are infringed. I think you must be patent lawyer to understand these and see the implications they will give us... As for the Exchange-Outlook protocol, there is inverse working on that, so it is not the same "problem" for me, and I think (hope) inverse has looked out for potential patent issues... André -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
At Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:16:08 -0500, Ludovic Marcotte wrote: > On 18/01/12 01:39, André Schild wrote: > > There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a > > link for download. > > I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. > We could also import it on our source repository. We did this a while > ago from the connector developed by Philipp Kewisch, but he soon after > abandoned its development. One of the problems with the existing SOGo backend is that it uses an old version of Z-Push that has a different license. The old version was GPLv2 only, newer versions are AGPLv3 only. Because the SOGo backend code doesn't have an explicit different license, we can only assume that it's GPLv2 only and can't use this code with newer Z-Push versions. I don't think we want to maintain our own Z-Push fork forever and not be able to use newer Z-Push features. Because of that and that I also read that it was not production quality, I tried to see how hard it would be to implement a new backend (without reading any of the old code of course) that uses caldav-client-2.php from davical to talk to the caldav server. I spend a few days working on it and got as far as that I could sync my calendar items from the server to the phone. I've just pushed the code to github in the case anyone would want to continue with the effort: https://github.com/dekkers/s-push/tree/caldav The problem is that I guess that 2-3 weeks of development time is needed to get two-way syncing of both calendar and contacts working and most bugs have been ironed out. I currently don't have the free time to do it and don't think there are enough people/companies willing to donate money to fund the development (but if you are, speak up here or in private, maybe I'm wrong and something like a kickstarter crowdfunding of this feature is possible). > > The one big advantage I see of ActiveSync is, that you have only one > > setup to do for Email,Calendar,Contacts and Tasks and all traffic > > flows via HTTP(S) > > > > There are several disadvantages of ActiveSync compared to native > > Cardav/Caldav support: > > - Only ONE Calendar, Contacts and Tasks can be synched This is actually a limitation a lot of clients have, but not a protocol limitation. The protocol supports multiple calendars/addressbooks/etc. > > - Only one ActiveSync account is possible This of course also depends on the client and some clients support multiple accounts. > > - Mail handling is very limited > Indeed but it should be compared with SyncML/Funambol, not CalDAV/CardDAV. > > I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., > Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. > > To offer a very good mobile experience, I feel we'll have to make a > choice and focus our efforts into one or the other. We chose Funambol > many years ago. It might have been a good choice back then but it > doesn't mean it's still the best. I think the advantage of ActiveSync is that almost every phone has ActiveSync built-in and that it's well tested. Having ActiveSync is pretty much a requirement for a mobile phone, compared to SyncML/Funambol that also needs to implement the client application. Another advantage of a caldav/carddav backend for Z-Push is that it can also be shared by other projects implementing caldav and/or carddav, such as for example davical. > On my end (and speaking for myself only), there are some things I > dislike about Funambol such as a worthless bug tracker, patches taking > decades to get accepted (or even bugs getting acknowledged), Java-based > (enough said here), requires more resources than all other SOGo > components and requirements combined together and multiplied by your > favorite factor of the day (must be greater than 2), almost impossible > to package together with SOGo and more. I agree about Funambol, I ditched it completely completely and currently only support iOS and Android for the very small group of customers I currently have. With regards to packaging, Z-Push is already packaged in Debian under the name D-Push because of trademarks. > What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device > synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML > and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time > and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be > done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the > Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement > doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. If you're concerned about patents on ActiveSync then you should also be concerned about the patents on the Exchange-Outlook protocol, because MS also lists quite a lot of patents in that area. At least they have been forced by the European Commission to disclose those patents, so it is possible to check whether any patents are infringed. Kind re
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 25.01.12 18:07, schrieb mayak-cq: as far as architecture goes, would a mysql backend scale better than *dav? No. Using the *dav interface there are some nice features provided by SOGo - sorted, change flags, calculated recurrences and so on. When you get the data directly from the database, you have to look for the right table, getting the interessting data (events), searching for recurrences ... not so funny to implement (I gave it a try ...). Maybe the performance would be a bit better accessing the database, but I think not really remarkable. And you would get the problems funambol has - it accesses the database ... a "z-unambol". Greetings, Martin -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 25.01.2012 18:07, schrieb mayak-cq: On Wed, 2012-01-25 at 17:37 +0100, André Schild wrote: Am 25.01.2012 16:20, schrieb Martin Rabl: Am 25.01.2012 15:58, schrieb Martin Lehmann: I have also seen this ActiveSync implementation. Maybe it's better than Z-Push? http://www.tine20.org/downloads/2011-05-6/tine20-activesync_2011-05-6.tar.bz2 Had a quick look over the code - it heavyly depends on tine data structures and classes - much effort solve this, I think. Then, it would be better to create a sophisticated ;-) sogo plugin for z-push which is more independent. A general problem for ActiveSync is this one (Taken from the tine20 website) http://www.tine20.org/wiki/index.php/Admins/Synchronisation#Patent_warning_for_US-based_users *Patent warning for US-based users * Don't use our implementation of ActiveSync if you live in the USA. As Microsoft has a software patent on ActiveSync you can not use our code free of charge. We are currently in contact with Microsoft to negotiate a deal for our US-based users. Any other users are free to use our ActiveSync implementation. This "potential" problem will also have to be considered by a z-push backend hi all, i had proposed a the creation of a bounty in a previous message to accomplish this work (and I guess we'll need to do it Euros -- i'm outside the US anyway ...) Me too, inverse too, but ca is near US ;) . i fully agree that activeSync support would be a fantastic addition to sogo. :) as far as architecture goes, would a mysql backend scale better than *dav? Perhaps, but this means that you will have to recode all business logic and access control once more (Just as it is for the current funambol connector) André -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On Wed, 2012-01-25 at 17:37 +0100, André Schild wrote: > Am 25.01.2012 16:20, schrieb Martin Rabl: > > > Am 25.01.2012 15:58, schrieb Martin Lehmann: > > > > > I have also seen this ActiveSync implementation. Maybe it's > > > better > > > than Z-Push? > > > http://www.tine20.org/downloads/2011-05-6/tine20-activesync_2011-05-6.tar.bz2 > > > > > > > Had a quick look over the code - it heavyly depends on tine data > > structures and classes - much effort solve this, I think. > > Then, it would be better to create a sophisticated ;-) sogo plugin > > for z-push which is more independent. > > A general problem for ActiveSync is this one (Taken from the tine20 > website) > http://www.tine20.org/wiki/index.php/Admins/Synchronisation#Patent_warning_for_US-based_users > > > > Patent warning for US-based users > > Don't use our implementation of ActiveSync if you live in the USA. As > Microsoft has a software patent on ActiveSync you can not use our code > free of charge. We are currently in contact with Microsoft to > negotiate a deal for our US-based users. > > Any other users are free to use our ActiveSync implementation. > > This "potential" problem will also have to be considered by a z-push > backend hi all, i had proposed a the creation of a bounty in a previous message to accomplish this work (and I guess we'll need to do it Euros -- i'm outside the US anyway ...). i fully agree that activeSync support would be a fantastic addition to sogo. as far as architecture goes, would a mysql backend scale better than *dav? thanks m -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 25.01.2012 16:20, schrieb Martin Rabl: Am 25.01.2012 15:58, schrieb Martin Lehmann: I have also seen this ActiveSync implementation. Maybe it's better than Z-Push? http://www.tine20.org/downloads/2011-05-6/tine20-activesync_2011-05-6.tar.bz2 Had a quick look over the code - it heavyly depends on tine data structures and classes - much effort solve this, I think. Then, it would be better to create a sophisticated ;-) sogo plugin for z-push which is more independent. A general problem for ActiveSync is this one (Taken from the tine20 website) http://www.tine20.org/wiki/index.php/Admins/Synchronisation#Patent_warning_for_US-based_users Patent warning for US-based users Don't use our implementation of ActiveSync if you live in the USA. As Microsoft has a software patent on ActiveSync you can not use our code free of charge. We are currently in contact with Microsoft to negotiate a deal for our US-based users. Any other users are free to use our ActiveSync implementation. This "potential" problem will also have to be considered by a z-push backend André -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 25.01.2012 14:53, schrieb Ludovic Marcotte: On 19/01/12 10:37, Ludovic Marcotte wrote: On 19/01/12 10:35, Bartłomiej Kluska wrote: maybe the question isn't very intelligent but why not implementing the SyncML functionality directly into SOGo (without Funambol or even Z-Push). Is Funambol server giving anything more than the SyncML functionality to SOGo? This should also be considered. Libsynthesis (https://gitorious.org/libsynthesis) could be used to expedite that development. One other option here, which I just reminded, would be to use the Funambol JSON Connector (https://json-connector.forge.funambol.org/). Using this, we would only need to implement the required JSON API in SOGo, which should be very simple. That API could also be used for other apps that want to consume data from SOGo in JSON. Everybody loves JSON and it's the solution to all problems! Yet another (non-standard) interface to implement in Sogo... Currently I don't see a advantage to introduce one more interface... Or are there thousands of other applications accessing cal/cardav infos (in a standard way) via JSON ? I think better to reuse the existing cal/car-dav stuff on (sogo) serverside so the sogo core can remain unchanged and improve. For sync with all other technologies I would use cal-/car-dav connector/adapter. And I don't think we should drop SyncML in favor of ActiveSync, but rather have both solutions, each one has it's own use cases, many similar, but you just can't always replace one with the other. André -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 25.01.2012 15:58, schrieb Martin Lehmann: And in my opinion Funambol is to buggy and makes to many problems. You're right, but maybe many bugs are from the direct database connection? FU looks for the events in the database of SOGo, so the interface between FU and SOGo are the tables. I think, the problems with Fu are coming from that. FU has to calculate some values (events etc.) and fails. Using a JSON-based datastore (instead of the database-based) could make it better - SOGo is the leader of the events it will give Fu (and other tools) and a data retrieve could be done in a caldav way, but so much easier (not the xml-ish in and out like in caldav) -- Greetings, Martin Rabl -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 25.01.2012 15:58, schrieb Martin Lehmann: I have also seen this ActiveSync implementation. Maybe it's better than Z-Push? http://www.tine20.org/downloads/2011-05-6/tine20-activesync_2011-05-6.tar.bz2 Had a quick look over the code - it heavyly depends on tine data structures and classes - much effort solve this, I think. Then, it would be better to create a sophisticated ;-) sogo plugin for z-push which is more independent. --- Greetings, Martin Rabl -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
I would also prefer using a "standalone" ActiveSync Solution like Z-Push oder the Tine´s One. I dont like 50 different daemons for 50 different use cases...and funambol eats resources...dont like that :-/ On 1/25/12 3:58 PM, Martin Lehmann wrote: But you still have the big monster Funambol-Server with all its problems and heavy resource requirements which also must be maintained by the admins besides SOGo, Samba4, ... And in my opinion Funambol is to buggy and makes to many problems. ActiveSync on top of a buggy system doesn't make it better. I'd prefer directly use ActiveSync via Z-Push on top of the very well working Caldav/Carddav. I have also seen this ActiveSync implementation. Maybe it's better than Z-Push? http://www.tine20.org/downloads/2011-05-6/tine20-activesync_2011-05-6.tar.bz2 Am 01/25/2012 03:07 PM, schrieb Alessio Fattorini: Nella citazione in data mer 25 gen 2012 14:53:24 CET, Ludovic Marcotte ha scritto: That API could also be used for other apps that want to consume data from SOGo in JSON. Everybody loves JSON and it's the solution to all problems! Hi Ludovic, We have some project in nodejs+javascript and read/write sogo data by json could be very very useful Other advantage about this solution? -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 25.01.2012 14:53, schrieb Ludovic Marcotte: One other option here, which I just reminded, would be to use the Funambol JSON Connector (https://json-connector.forge.funambol.org/). Hm - this one to connect SOGo and Funambol to each other instead of using the database? Could be done over a URL like http://sogo.server.net/SOGo/json// ? That API could also be used for other apps that want to consume data from SOGo in JSON. ;-) i. e. for EAS aka z-push > Everybody loves JSON and it's the solution to all problems! :) peace on earth! Seriously, this seems to be a good idea and brings a RPC-like interface to us. Ludovic, how much efforts do you estimate, if possible now? -- Greetings, Martin Rabl -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
But you still have the big monster Funambol-Server with all its problems and heavy resource requirements which also must be maintained by the admins besides SOGo, Samba4, ... And in my opinion Funambol is to buggy and makes to many problems. ActiveSync on top of a buggy system doesn't make it better. I'd prefer directly use ActiveSync via Z-Push on top of the very well working Caldav/Carddav. I have also seen this ActiveSync implementation. Maybe it's better than Z-Push? http://www.tine20.org/downloads/2011-05-6/tine20-activesync_2011-05-6.tar.bz2 Am 01/25/2012 03:07 PM, schrieb Alessio Fattorini: Nella citazione in data mer 25 gen 2012 14:53:24 CET, Ludovic Marcotte ha scritto: That API could also be used for other apps that want to consume data from SOGo in JSON. Everybody loves JSON and it's the solution to all problems! Hi Ludovic, We have some project in nodejs+javascript and read/write sogo data by json could be very very useful Other advantage about this solution? -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Nella citazione in data mer 25 gen 2012 14:53:24 CET, Ludovic Marcotte ha scritto: That API could also be used for other apps that want to consume data from SOGo in JSON. Everybody loves JSON and it's the solution to all problems! Hi Ludovic, We have some project in nodejs+javascript and read/write sogo data by json could be very very useful Other advantage about this solution? -- -- Alessio Fattorini (alessio.fattor...@nethesis.it) nethesis srl - Via degli Olmi 16/4 - 61100 Pesaro (PU) tel. +39 0721 405516 - fax +39 0721 268147 www.nethesis.it - i...@nethesis.it -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On 19/01/12 10:37, Ludovic Marcotte wrote: On 19/01/12 10:35, Bartłomiej Kluska wrote: maybe the question isn't very intelligent but why not implementing the SyncML functionality directly into SOGo (without Funambol or even Z-Push). Is Funambol server giving anything more than the SyncML functionality to SOGo? This should also be considered. Libsynthesis (https://gitorious.org/libsynthesis) could be used to expedite that development. One other option here, which I just reminded, would be to use the Funambol JSON Connector (https://json-connector.forge.funambol.org/). Using this, we would only need to implement the required JSON API in SOGo, which should be very simple. That API could also be used for other apps that want to consume data from SOGo in JSON. Everybody loves JSON and it's the solution to all problems! -- Ludovic Marcotte lmarco...@inverse.ca :: +1.514.755.3630 :: www.inverse.ca Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (www.packetfence.org) -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 12:00 +0100, Martin Lehmann wrote: > I'd also like to see Activesync support besides Caldav/Carddav in Sogo > as nearly every mobile device has native support for it and it's the > de-facto Sync standard. > > SyncML is sometimes nice but in our tests it was to unstable and had to > many problems. It happens very often that all synced data appear not > only once on the device but 2,3,4... times and after every following > sync they appear one more time. This seems to happen if there was a sync > error through a bad connection, which can happen very often, or > something other. hi all, yes -- me too. i would very much like to see activesysnc/z-push support for sogo ... in its current form, i believe that the sogo-sync z-push backend communicates with sogo over caldav/carddav -- there could have been other approaches (mysql, syncml) but i think that caldav/carddav makes the most sense as it will allow integration with any other correct implementation of these protocols. Anyone else have thoughts about that? does caldav and carddav scale as well as syncml or mysql? there were previous posts to this list concerning issues of the stateful nature of activesync, thereby making it difficult to run across load balanced servers ... i'd like to propose a bounty to get the existing z-push backend up to snuff with the latest version of IOS as well as the newest versions of android. is anyone listening to this thread capable of modifying the existing backend? can you estimate the cost of getting sogo-sync "fully" implemented? is *dav the right approach? cheers m -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
I'd also like to see Activesync support besides Caldav/Carddav in Sogo as nearly every mobile device has native support for it and it's the de-facto Sync standard. SyncML is sometimes nice but in our tests it was to unstable and had to many problems. It happens very often that all synced data appear not only once on the device but 2,3,4... times and after every following sync they appear one more time. This seems to happen if there was a sync error through a bad connection, which can happen very often, or something other. Caldav/Carddav is the best choice I know. He had never problems with it. But as Caldav is not supported by the majority of devices, ActiveSync seems the 2nd best choice as it's working better in our tests than SyncML and natively supported by most devices. Am 21.01.2012 08:24, schrieb Heiner Markert: Am Friday 20 January 2012 20:44:58 schrieb André Schild: Am 20.01.2012 19:44, schrieb Heiner Markert: Am Wednesday 18 January 2012 20:16:08 schrieb Ludovic Marcotte: On 18/01/12 01:39, André Schild wrote: I don't see why we should drop SyncML support, it's working after all and a OPEN standard... The Problem with Activesync stuff is always the potential license question, what if MS will start claim license violations by Z-Push (Justified or not does not matter) ? I fully agree here about the licensing violation. There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a link for download. I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. We could also import it on our source repository. We did this a while ago from the connector developed by Philipp Kewisch, but he soon after abandoned its development. The one big advantage I see of ActiveSync is, that you have only one setup to do for Email,Calendar,Contacts and Tasks and all traffic flows via HTTP(S) There are several disadvantages of ActiveSync compared to native Cardav/Caldav support: - Only ONE Calendar, Contacts and Tasks can be synched - Only one ActiveSync account is possible - Mail handling is very limited Indeed but it should be compared with SyncML/Funambol, not CalDAV/CardDAV. I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. To offer a very good mobile experience, I feel we'll have to make a choice and focus our efforts into one or the other. We chose Funambol many years ago. It might have been a good choice back then but it doesn't mean it's still the best. On my end (and speaking for myself only), there are some things I dislike about Funambol such as a worthless bug tracker, patches taking decades to get accepted (or even bugs getting acknowledged), Java-based (enough said here), requires more resources than all other SOGo components and requirements combined together and multiplied by your favorite factor of the day (must be greater than 2), almost impossible to package together with SOGo and more. What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. Hello, despite the issues, I would very much like to see a z-push sogo or even a more general z-push caldav/carddav backend. In my experience, activesync support is more mature on the phones I experimented with, than syncml support is. And almost any phone supports it. For Smartphones thats completely true, but for non smartphones you often have only SyncML builtin. (So they don't have to pay license fees to microsoft for including the active sync protocol in the phones) André Hello, very recently I've seen a rather cheap Samsung feature-phone (around 75€ in Germany) that did come with Activesync, but no Syncml client, so Activesync seems to be arriving at non-smartphones. Even simpler entry-level basic phones, from my experience, ususally have no or nearly unusable calendar application and are not able to sync at all. Best regards Heiner -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am Friday 20 January 2012 20:44:58 schrieb André Schild: > Am 20.01.2012 19:44, schrieb Heiner Markert: > > Am Wednesday 18 January 2012 20:16:08 schrieb Ludovic Marcotte: > >> On 18/01/12 01:39, André Schild wrote: > >>> I don't see why we should drop SyncML support, it's working after all > >>> and a OPEN standard... > >>> The Problem with Activesync stuff is always the potential license > >>> question, what if MS will start claim license violations by Z-Push > >>> (Justified or not does not matter) ? > >> > >> I fully agree here about the licensing violation. > >> > >>> There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a > >>> link for download. > >>> I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. > >> > >> We could also import it on our source repository. We did this a while > >> ago from the connector developed by Philipp Kewisch, but he soon after > >> abandoned its development. > >> > >>> The one big advantage I see of ActiveSync is, that you have only one > >>> setup to do for Email,Calendar,Contacts and Tasks and all traffic > >>> flows via HTTP(S) > >>> > >>> There are several disadvantages of ActiveSync compared to native > >>> Cardav/Caldav support: > >>> - Only ONE Calendar, Contacts and Tasks can be synched > >>> - Only one ActiveSync account is possible > >>> - Mail handling is very limited > >> > >> Indeed but it should be compared with SyncML/Funambol, not > >> CalDAV/CardDAV. > >> > >> I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., > >> Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. > >> > >> To offer a very good mobile experience, I feel we'll have to make a > >> choice and focus our efforts into one or the other. We chose Funambol > >> many years ago. It might have been a good choice back then but it > >> doesn't mean it's still the best. > >> > >> On my end (and speaking for myself only), there are some things I > >> dislike about Funambol such as a worthless bug tracker, patches taking > >> decades to get accepted (or even bugs getting acknowledged), Java-based > >> (enough said here), requires more resources than all other SOGo > >> components and requirements combined together and multiplied by your > >> favorite factor of the day (must be greater than 2), almost impossible > >> to package together with SOGo and more. > >> > >> What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device > >> synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML > >> and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time > >> and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be > >> done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the > >> Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement > >> doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. > > > > Hello, > > > > despite the issues, I would very much like to see a z-push sogo or even a > > more general z-push caldav/carddav backend. > > In my experience, activesync support is more mature on the phones I > > experimented with, than syncml support is. And almost any phone supports > > it. > > For Smartphones thats completely true, but for non smartphones > you often have only SyncML builtin. (So they don't have to pay license > fees to microsoft for including the active sync protocol in the phones) > > André Hello, very recently I've seen a rather cheap Samsung feature-phone (around 75€ in Germany) that did come with Activesync, but no Syncml client, so Activesync seems to be arriving at non-smartphones. Even simpler entry-level basic phones, from my experience, ususally have no or nearly unusable calendar application and are not able to sync at all. Best regards Heiner -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 20.01.2012 19:44, schrieb Heiner Markert: Am Wednesday 18 January 2012 20:16:08 schrieb Ludovic Marcotte: On 18/01/12 01:39, André Schild wrote: I don't see why we should drop SyncML support, it's working after all and a OPEN standard... The Problem with Activesync stuff is always the potential license question, what if MS will start claim license violations by Z-Push (Justified or not does not matter) ? I fully agree here about the licensing violation. There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a link for download. I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. We could also import it on our source repository. We did this a while ago from the connector developed by Philipp Kewisch, but he soon after abandoned its development. The one big advantage I see of ActiveSync is, that you have only one setup to do for Email,Calendar,Contacts and Tasks and all traffic flows via HTTP(S) There are several disadvantages of ActiveSync compared to native Cardav/Caldav support: - Only ONE Calendar, Contacts and Tasks can be synched - Only one ActiveSync account is possible - Mail handling is very limited Indeed but it should be compared with SyncML/Funambol, not CalDAV/CardDAV. I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. To offer a very good mobile experience, I feel we'll have to make a choice and focus our efforts into one or the other. We chose Funambol many years ago. It might have been a good choice back then but it doesn't mean it's still the best. On my end (and speaking for myself only), there are some things I dislike about Funambol such as a worthless bug tracker, patches taking decades to get accepted (or even bugs getting acknowledged), Java-based (enough said here), requires more resources than all other SOGo components and requirements combined together and multiplied by your favorite factor of the day (must be greater than 2), almost impossible to package together with SOGo and more. What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. Hello, despite the issues, I would very much like to see a z-push sogo or even a more general z-push caldav/carddav backend. In my experience, activesync support is more mature on the phones I experimented with, than syncml support is. And almost any phone supports it. For Smartphones thats completely true, but for non smartphones you often have only SyncML builtin. (So they don't have to pay license fees to microsoft for including the active sync protocol in the phones) André -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am Wednesday 18 January 2012 20:16:08 schrieb Ludovic Marcotte: > On 18/01/12 01:39, André Schild wrote: > > I don't see why we should drop SyncML support, it's working after all > > and a OPEN standard... > > The Problem with Activesync stuff is always the potential license > > question, what if MS will start claim license violations by Z-Push > > (Justified or not does not matter) ? > > I fully agree here about the licensing violation. > > > There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a > > link for download. > > I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. > > We could also import it on our source repository. We did this a while > ago from the connector developed by Philipp Kewisch, but he soon after > abandoned its development. > > > The one big advantage I see of ActiveSync is, that you have only one > > setup to do for Email,Calendar,Contacts and Tasks and all traffic > > flows via HTTP(S) > > > > There are several disadvantages of ActiveSync compared to native > > Cardav/Caldav support: > > - Only ONE Calendar, Contacts and Tasks can be synched > > - Only one ActiveSync account is possible > > - Mail handling is very limited > > Indeed but it should be compared with SyncML/Funambol, not CalDAV/CardDAV. > > I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., > Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. > > To offer a very good mobile experience, I feel we'll have to make a > choice and focus our efforts into one or the other. We chose Funambol > many years ago. It might have been a good choice back then but it > doesn't mean it's still the best. > > On my end (and speaking for myself only), there are some things I > dislike about Funambol such as a worthless bug tracker, patches taking > decades to get accepted (or even bugs getting acknowledged), Java-based > (enough said here), requires more resources than all other SOGo > components and requirements combined together and multiplied by your > favorite factor of the day (must be greater than 2), almost impossible > to package together with SOGo and more. > > What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device > synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML > and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time > and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be > done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the > Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement > doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. > Hello, despite the issues, I would very much like to see a z-push sogo or even a more general z-push caldav/carddav backend. In my experience, activesync support is more mature on the phones I experimented with, than syncml support is. And almost any phone supports it. While syncml works well in some cases, I rarely experienced really satisfying syncml support. For example, despite the work put into the sogo funambol connector, it still does not sync alarms back from a Nokia device to the server correctly (probably bug 586). If sogo switches to activesync, please keep support for syncing multiple calendars and probably also multiple address books - this is a great feature, in particular combined with the unique sync tags! Best regards Heiner -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
RE: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
> On 19/01/12 10:35, Bartłomiej Kluska wrote: > > maybe the question isn't very intelligent but why not implementing the > > SyncML functionality directly into SOGo (without Funambol or > even Z-Push). > > Is Funambol server giving anything more than the SyncML functionality to > > SOGo? > This should also be considered. > > Libsynthesis (https://gitorious.org/libsynthesis) could be used to > expedite that development. Even if SOGo would have "own" SyncML functionality, users could still take advantage of Funambol clients for Outlook or for mobile devices. It'll be compatible because it's the same standard. Regards BK > -Original Message- > From: Ludovic Marcotte [mailto:lmarco...@inverse.ca] > Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 4:37 PM > To: users@sogo.nu > Subject: Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will > be obtained. > -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On 19/01/12 10:35, Bartłomiej Kluska wrote: maybe the question isn't very intelligent but why not implementing the SyncML functionality directly into SOGo (without Funambol or even Z-Push). Is Funambol server giving anything more than the SyncML functionality to SOGo? This should also be considered. Libsynthesis (https://gitorious.org/libsynthesis) could be used to expedite that development. -- Ludovic Marcotte lmarco...@inverse.ca :: +1.514.755.3630 :: www.inverse.ca Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (www.packetfence.org) -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
RE: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Hello maybe the question isn't very intelligent but why not implementing the SyncML functionality directly into SOGo (without Funambol or even Z-Push). Is Funambol server giving anything more than the SyncML functionality to SOGo? I don't know how big effort such implementation would be, but I've seen that such solution is done in Horde-kronolith so I'm assuming that it's generally possible. Regards, BK > -Original Message- > From: Jan-Frode Myklebust [mailto:janfr...@tanso.net] > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 10:41 PM > To: users@sogo.nu > Subject: Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will > be obtained. > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:14:38PM +0100, André Schild wrote: > > >>the licensing agreement doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. > > >Is z-push that much different of a threat than the Open^H^H^H^Hchange- > > >replacement you seem to be doing in v2.0 ? > > OpenChange has nothing to do with ActiveSync. -cut- -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:14:38PM +0100, André Schild wrote: > >>the licensing agreement doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. > >Is z-push that much different of a threat than the Open^H^H^H^Hchange- > >replacement you seem to be doing in v2.0 ? > OpenChange has nothing to do with ActiveSync. > > OpenChange implements MAPI on the server, so (all) mapi compatible > can talk to the server > z-Push implements ActiveSync on the server, so all active sync > clients can talk to the server I see it as: z-push implements microsofts proprietary ActiveSync protocol. OpenChange implements microsofts proprietary MAPI protocol. > The current z-push sogo backend uses CalDav/CardDav to access Sogo > resources, > the Funambol client directly accesses the database Yes, I know. I tested the sogosync-version about a year ago, and it looked like a very nice solution that could be run as a completely separate service from the rest of sogo (pure caldav/carddav/imap-client). Funambol looked like a very intrusive solution, poking inside the sogo database directly, having it's own userdatabase (if I remember correctly). And probably introducing version dependencies between funambol server and sogo server. I'd much rather push my users towards installing a 3. party caldav/carddav client, and avoid the need for anything serverside. -jf -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 18.01.2012 21:59, schrieb Jan-Frode Myklebust: On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 02:16:08PM -0500, Ludovic Marcotte wrote: I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. I'm struggeling with seeing why one would push Funambol/SyncML. It requires 3. party agent on all phones (except nokia), and then one could just as well use a 3. party caldav/carddav client. Open standard with no potential licensing problems. Also not all ActiveSync clients behave well, they all have their own problems... (For example the HTC Desire ActiveSync client behaves very bad against Exchange 2010 servers) While activesync is supported on all (?) phones, with single config for mail/contacts/calendar. That's what we want! What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. Is z-push that much different of a threat than the Open^H^H^H^Hchange- replacement you seem to be doing in v2.0 ? OpenChange has nothing to do with ActiveSync. OpenChange implements MAPI on the server, so (all) mapi compatible can talk to the server z-Push implements ActiveSync on the server, so all active sync clients can talk to the server MAPI and ActiveSync have on the company behind it in common, nothing more, technically it's completely different. The current z-push sogo backend uses CalDav/CardDav to access Sogo resources, the Funambol client directly accesses the database André -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 02:16:08PM -0500, Ludovic Marcotte wrote: > I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., > Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. I'm struggeling with seeing why one would push Funambol/SyncML. It requires 3. party agent on all phones (except nokia), and then one could just as well use a 3. party caldav/carddav client. While activesync is supported on all (?) phones, with single config for mail/contacts/calendar. That's what we want! > > What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device > synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with > Funambol/SyncML and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is > very valuable time and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector > up and running can be done in a snap, but refining it will take some > time. Also, having the Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding > the licensing agreement doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. Is z-push that much different of a threat than the Open^H^H^H^Hchange- replacement you seem to be doing in v2.0 ? -jf -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On 1/18/2012 1:16 PM, Ludovic Marcotte wrote: On 18/01/12 01:39, André Schild wrote: I don't see why we should drop SyncML support, it's working after all and a OPEN standard... The Problem with Activesync stuff is always the potential license question, what if MS will start claim license violations by Z-Push (Justified or not does not matter) ? I fully agree here about the licensing violation. There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a link for download. I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. We could also import it on our source repository. We did this a while ago from the connector developed by Philipp Kewisch, but he soon after abandoned its development. The one big advantage I see of ActiveSync is, that you have only one setup to do for Email,Calendar,Contacts and Tasks and all traffic flows via HTTP(S) There are several disadvantages of ActiveSync compared to native Cardav/Caldav support: - Only ONE Calendar, Contacts and Tasks can be synched - Only one ActiveSync account is possible - Mail handling is very limited Indeed but it should be compared with SyncML/Funambol, not CalDAV/CardDAV. I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. To offer a very good mobile experience, I feel we'll have to make a choice and focus our efforts into one or the other. We chose Funambol many years ago. It might have been a good choice back then but it doesn't mean it's still the best. On my end (and speaking for myself only), there are some things I dislike about Funambol such as a worthless bug tracker, patches taking decades to get accepted (or even bugs getting acknowledged), Java-based (enough said here), requires more resources than all other SOGo components and requirements combined together and multiplied by your favorite factor of the day (must be greater than 2), almost impossible to package together with SOGo and more. What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. The biggest selling point for the z-push style email for us was that we could run it on port 80/443 and was approved to pass through the state firewall. That and all apple and android phones already have clients for it without having to download something else. Donny B. -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On 18/01/12 01:39, André Schild wrote: I don't see why we should drop SyncML support, it's working after all and a OPEN standard... The Problem with Activesync stuff is always the potential license question, what if MS will start claim license violations by Z-Push (Justified or not does not matter) ? I fully agree here about the licensing violation. There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a link for download. I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. We could also import it on our source repository. We did this a while ago from the connector developed by Philipp Kewisch, but he soon after abandoned its development. The one big advantage I see of ActiveSync is, that you have only one setup to do for Email,Calendar,Contacts and Tasks and all traffic flows via HTTP(S) There are several disadvantages of ActiveSync compared to native Cardav/Caldav support: - Only ONE Calendar, Contacts and Tasks can be synched - Only one ActiveSync account is possible - Mail handling is very limited Indeed but it should be compared with SyncML/Funambol, not CalDAV/CardDAV. I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. To offer a very good mobile experience, I feel we'll have to make a choice and focus our efforts into one or the other. We chose Funambol many years ago. It might have been a good choice back then but it doesn't mean it's still the best. On my end (and speaking for myself only), there are some things I dislike about Funambol such as a worthless bug tracker, patches taking decades to get accepted (or even bugs getting acknowledged), Java-based (enough said here), requires more resources than all other SOGo components and requirements combined together and multiplied by your favorite factor of the day (must be greater than 2), almost impossible to package together with SOGo and more. What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. -- Ludovic Marcotte lmarco...@inverse.ca :: +1.514.755.3630 :: www.inverse.ca Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (www.packetfence.org) -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
On 1/18/2012 12:42 PM, Heiner Markert wrote: Am Wednesday 18 January 2012 07:39:20 schrieb André Schild: There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a link for download. I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. Hello André, unfortunately I am unable to find a download link "a few posts ago". Would you mind to post the link again, if you have a link different from http://www.algepop.net/users/alge/sogo/z-push/ ? Best regards Heiner On January 9, 2012 I posted the link to the modified z-push we are running. I will repost it here too: http://www.mdah.state.ms.us/emailupload/uploads/sogosync.zip Donny B. -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am Wednesday 18 January 2012 07:39:20 schrieb André Schild: > > There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a > link for download. > I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. Hello André, unfortunately I am unable to find a download link "a few posts ago". Would you mind to post the link again, if you have a link different from http://www.algepop.net/users/alge/sogo/z-push/ ? Best regards Heiner -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
Re: [SOGo] Why not move from Funambol to Z-Push? Many features will be obtained.
Am 18.01.2012 05:45, schrieb Francisco Adote AKUESON.: Hi sogo users and contributors, As you know, 1. *The Funambol SOGo Connector allows any SyncML enabled devices to fully synchronize contacts, events and tasks with SOGo. The connector is fast and reliable. It features :* * Two-way synchronization support * Contacts, events and tasks support * vCalendar / vCard with version downgrade support * Full SIF support 2. *The Z-Push is an open source ActiveSync implementation. It supports push email, and synchronization of contacts, calendar, and tasks. It features : * * ActiveSync Push Email, Contact, Calendar and Task synchronization * Already tested on Zimbra groupware with: o Windows Mobile 6.5 o Samsung Galaxy S - android 2.2.1 & 2.3.3, 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 (No native task sync) o Apple iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch - iOS4 & iOS5 o - Task sync with iOS5 Reminders (no iOS4 native Task sync) o Nokia E71 (MailForExchange 3.00.50 & 3.00.73) * Already tested on Zarafa: o please, check document added, Zarafa Mobile compatibility * *And then, this morning i would like to suggest, according to these interesting features we can have using Z-Push on our SOGo solutions, to write code for a backend for Z-Push to work with SOGo for email, contacts, agenda and notes and to move a little by little from Funambol to Z-Push? * * Really, using Z-Push, I think that It will permit to us, SOGo users to have a strong and efficient groupware. So, please, everybody, compare in your side, advantages we will have to use *Z-Push* instead of Funambol and we will discuss together about them. I don't see why we should drop SyncML support, it's working after all and a OPEN standard... The Problem with Activesync stuff is always the potential license question, what if MS will start claim license violations by Z-Push (Justified or not does not matter) ? There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a link for download. I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. The one big advantage I see of ActiveSync is, that you have only one setup to do for Email,Calendar,Contacts and Tasks and all traffic flows via HTTP(S) There are several disadvantages of ActiveSync compared to native Cardav/Caldav support: - Only ONE Calendar, Contacts and Tasks can be synched - Only one ActiveSync account is possible - Mail handling is very limited André -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
