On Fr, 2011-07-15 at 15:24 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jul 2011, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > > That's indeed way too clever. Remember that the account and thus the > > activesyncd may be shared by multiple, independent pieces of software. > > They need to cooperate on the creation of the gconf configs, but they > > shouldn't be forced to coordinate their access to those configs once > > that is done. Therefore different configs really must be completely > > separate. > > On the other hand, provisioned device-ids are at a premium. It's OK right > now while we're testing, but remember that in production there are > various external steps you may have to go through to get a new device > approved for provisioning. In the common case that you have a mail client > and a sync client both accessing the server, we *don't* want that to > appear as two devices.
For that case we have the common setup UI which creates the mail and sync config sharing the same account in gconf. -- 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
