On Mi, 2010-02-17 at 17:29 +0000, Lukas Zeller wrote: > The big problem is that the device (Nokia phone) usually asks for the > server devInf BEFORE it sends it's own devInf, but the server can't > detect what device it is talking to before receiving devInf.
Asking for DevInf before sending its own would probably confuse even more devices, right? Speaking of confused, I'm a bit confused about CTCap inside DevInf right now. In the SyncEvolution client <-> SyncEvolution server scenario, the client sends DevInf including CTCap to the server in its first message. The server sends DevInf in its reply, but without any CTCap. I don't have <showctcapproperties> in my config. I would expect to see the server's CTCap in the session. Any idea why it is not sent? > So the the changes we make to the devInf to make Nokias happy would > be global for all devices. While hiding a problematic parameter like > X-EVOLUTION-UI-SLOT with show="no" is acceptable, > <showctcapproperties>=no is certainly not; we don't want to globally > disable all field negotiating capabilities just because one class of > devices. I agree. -- 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. _______________________________________________ SyncEvolution mailing list [email protected] http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
