On Sat, 2007-12-08 at 14:53 +0000, John Carr wrote: > > The ideal way i think is to have a small team, of 2 or 3 individuals > > working on the documentation, a small team working closely together on > > this should be able to bring the documentation up to date in no time, > > even a one man team should be able to do it in little time. > > The documentation would have probably been written by now if someone > would have replied to my proposed structure. > > My feeling was that myself and Jonnylamb should make the initial pass. > Mainly to get the structure right. We are also keen to moderate the > new wiki as the old one has errors... And looking at the "resources" > on ubuntuforums.org we are keen not to have just anyone writing things > on there - the "help" is often dangerous or just plain wrong.
I'll see if i can digg up that post of yours, it was prior to my arrival on the ML. > > I like the HAL idea alot, but i don't know if HAL reacts to eg a > > bluetooth device connecting to the PC > > There is a project underway somewhere to take care of that. "Not yet" > would be the response. Cool. > > > Have been in talks with Ubuntu (wrt Conduit and sync that "just works" > > > - you plug it in and it says "where sync to.. k thx bye") and its > > > likely that we'll see some support into pulling the latest and > > > greatest into the next release (probably more in terms of acceptance > > > rather than actual man hours)... > > > > I wrote that initial draft, conduit seems like an excellent 'glue' to > > tie synce and eg gnokii together. > > Tis great to here acceptance (wrt conduit). Its taken a lot to get so > far, and some peoples attitudes just make you want to give in. Conduit is shaping up really nicely, definatly a project that's on my radar ;) > > > There is no "modern" way to sync 2003 devices. You seem to have to use > > > ancient programs like a pre-opensync version of multisync. About 1 in > > > 5 #synce requests is WM2003 related... That was a guess. Enough for it > > > to bother me that we don't offer support any more :P > > > > You want to drop WM2003? > > Hope my reply got through! No, my desire was that jagow might be able > to resurrect the RRA stuff inside sync-engine. Yaay for Jagow! ^^ > > > I presume vdcccm won't support WM6? It also doesn't work with > > > sync-engine. Unfortunately dropping it hurts KDE users, who often ask > > > about RAKI. I have no idea what exactly that is, but seems not to work > > > with odccm. Yet. I am strongly in favor of having just one *dccm. > > > Either RAKI support in odccm or another standalone proggy, or vdccm > > > needs to be extended for WM6 and needs to be made to work with > > > sync-engine? > > > > vdccm also works with the ancient multisync for wm2003 devices > > With the work that jagow and mark are doing that won't matter - we can > have a nice working and modern opensync/sync-engine/odccm. Really > don't want to have to figure out and document years old releases of > things :-) So, no legacy section in the docs then? ;) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ SynCE-Devel mailing list SynCE-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/synce-devel
