----- Original Message ----- > I am having a hard time parsing your double negatives here to be > honest. We can go the 1.1 route without two flag days. If you > disagree, please speak up. If not, lets move on.
If we can avoid two flag days, that would be great. I'm not qualified to answer that, but I have more observations and questions: 1. In my early discussions with the old Services team, Sync 2.0 was termed: (Sync 1.1 + bug fixes) + pluggable Auth. This that a reasonable definition? 2. Getting Sync 1.1 to work with a new Auth means work. Work on the client as well as the server. Does starting with Sync 2.0 get us some baseline of completed Server work? 3. I have heard the Android client code was built with Sync 2.0 in mind. Does that mean we are not in "re-write the world" mode if we decide to move ahead with Sync 2.0? 4. I have heard that some Sync 2.0 Javascript client code exists in mozilla-central and could give us some baseline of completed Desktop client work. True? Somewhat true? False? 5. No client-side work has been done on Sync 1.1 (existing code) since perhaps the beginning of 2013. There are extensive lists of existing bugs and no one has been fixing them. The team was disbanded. 6. There is a general assumption that the only thing broken with Sync 1.1 is scalability, which was "fixed" last month (thanks ServerOps), but the long list of SUMO complaints and the bug lists in #5 tell a different story. 7. Neither Sync 1.1 or Sync 2.0 support the level of server-side durability we want moving forward. I assume neither one has an advantage over the other for getting server-canonical durability. True? 8. Server side work has already started to stand up the Sync 2.0, so unbitrotting, auth integration and server durability work can commence. Using Sync 1.1 as a foundation for moving ahead would not be the cheapest solution. There is work to get the Auth system working with it, and significant bugs that need to be addressed. Sync 2.0 appears to be an effort by the Services team (server and client) to address some of Sync 1.1 short comings and get pluggable Auth working. This seems like what we would need to do if we started with Sync 1.1 anyway. If we are set on using the existing Sync codebase to start building Sync.next, we should use Sync 2.0 and not Sync 1.1 as the foundation. Sync 1.1 takes us to far back in time.
_______________________________________________ Sync-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/sync-dev
