Hello,
maybe I misread the patch (on the way home, iPhone...) but for the
server subdatastores should not be hidden. For the client, I agree, in
a session using the superdatastore the subdatastores should not be
included in the defInf.
[email protected]
On 19.02.2010, at 15:33, Patrick Ohly <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fr, 2010-02-19 at 12:47 +0000, Patrick Ohly wrote:
I can imagine that including stores which have not been alerted yet
might be useful, in case that the client sends an <Alert> for one
store
first and later for another one, but sending all stores with the same
URI as above doesn't make sense to me.
Attached is a patch which might do the job of suppressing sub-
datastores
in the DevInf. Untested, because I cannot reproduce the situation
here.
Jussi, can you apply it and check whether the "right thing" (= one
datastore for "calendar+todo") is sent?
Does it have any effect on the remaining problem with calendar updates
on the device?
--
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.
<no-substores.patch>
_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
