On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 17:27 +0100, Christian Hilberg wrote:
> Am Freitag 18 November 2011, um 16:53:38 schrieb Patrick Ohly:
> > On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 11:23 +0100, Christian Hilberg wrote:
> > > > That is the whole point of this mail thread: a vCard UID may have a
> > > > meaning outside of the sto
Hi,
Am Freitag 18 November 2011, um 16:53:38 schrieb Patrick Ohly:
> On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 11:23 +0100, Christian Hilberg wrote:
> [...]
> > While the E-D-S client (like Evo) might not be interested whether it is
> > a Kolab backend being used, there is still one thing you may wish to
> > consid
On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 11:23 +0100, Christian Hilberg wrote:
> Am Mittwoch 16 November 2011, um 15:55:54 schrieb Patrick Ohly:
> > Hello!
> > [...]
> > On Di, 2011-11-15 at 15:01 +0100, Christian Hilberg wrote:
> > > If a new UID is to be created, it is the responsibility of the Kolab
> > > client
Hi Patrick,
Am Mittwoch 16 November 2011, um 15:55:54 schrieb Patrick Ohly:
> Hello!
> [...]
> On Di, 2011-11-15 at 15:01 +0100, Christian Hilberg wrote:
> > If a new UID is to be created, it is the responsibility of the Kolab client
> > to
> > assign one. The Kolab server itself is unaware to ob
On mié, 2011-11-16 at 15:55 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
>
> CouchDB comes close, but is a closed system. You also cannot create two
> independent CouchDB instances and then merge them (at least that is my
> understanding - I might be wrong on that particular aspect).
>
not sure what you mean, but
Hello!
Before I reply to Christian, let me elaborate a bit more on why
overwriting the UID is bad for syncing. I thought it was obvious, but
probably not ;-}
What I have in mind is a system where contact data moves freely and
ad-hoc between peers, without being forced to go through a central
serv
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 10:00 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I'd like to write down some thoughts on vCard UID handling in EDS.
> Andrew mentioned it on IRC, so I'm copying him.
>
> Let me define the terms to make the difference clear:
> * UID: part of the contact properties. Ideally
On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 08:41 +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 21:06 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > What about a CardDAV server? It has server-supplied IDs (the path to the
> > resource) and a UID as part of the vCard stored there? How is that
> > handled at the moment?
>
> Hi,
Am Dienstag 15 November 2011, um 15:01:54 schrieb Christian Hilberg:
> Am Dienstag 15 November 2011, um 11:03:24 schrieb Patrick Ohly:
> [...]
> > What happens during syncing? Do you resolve the add<->add conflict by
> > duplicating the item, merging them or discarding one copy?
>
> This is a con
Hi there,
Am Dienstag 15 November 2011, um 11:03:24 schrieb Patrick Ohly:
> On Di, 2011-11-15 at 10:50 +0100, Christian Hilberg wrote:
> [...]
> > Just adding a few bits on how the situation is for the Kolab groupware
> > server.
> >
> > The evolution-kolab backend cannot ask the Kolab server f
On Di, 2011-11-15 at 10:50 +0100, Christian Hilberg wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Am Montag 14 November 2011, um 11:22:57 schrieb Milan Crha:
> > On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 10:00 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > So I suggest to pursue the first approach instead. I think it is
> > > possible for the file ba
Hi everyone,
Am Montag 14 November 2011, um 11:22:57 schrieb Milan Crha:
> On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 10:00 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > So I suggest to pursue the first approach instead. I think it is
> > possible for the file backend.
> >
> > Is it also possible for other backends? Or are some una
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 21:06 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> What about a CardDAV server? It has server-supplied IDs (the path to the
> resource) and a UID as part of the vCard stored there? How is that
> handled at the moment?
Hi,
there is no exact support for CardDAV as such, the closest is
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 21:06 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Mo, 2011-11-14 at 11:22 +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 10:00 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > So I suggest to pursue the first approach instead. I think it is
> > > possible for the file backend.
> > > Is it also possib
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 21:06 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Mo, 2011-11-14 at 11:22 +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 10:00 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > So I suggest to pursue the first approach instead. I think it is
> > > possible for the file backend.
> > > Is it also possib
On Mo, 2011-11-14 at 11:22 +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 10:00 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > So I suggest to pursue the first approach instead. I think it is
> > possible for the file backend.
> >
> > Is it also possible for other backends? Or are some unable to store
> > the U
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 10:00 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> So I suggest to pursue the first approach instead. I think it is
> possible for the file backend.
>
> Is it also possible for other backends? Or are some unable to store
> the UID and look up contacts (efficiently) by it? In that case we wil
17 matches
Mail list logo
