On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 14:23 +0530, Sachin Gupta wrote:
> Thanks Patrick.
> 
> "It depends on whether the server uses the sent DevInf at all". This
> statement helped a lot :)
> 
> You were right!. Funambol is not considering the device capabilities.
> I tested by removing the TEL property from client devinf, but still
> Funambol did not take this into consideration and as part of the
> refresh-from-server, Funambol sent the complete TEL information.

That alone might not be enough to determine whether the info is used.
Even if the client does not support a property, the server might still
send it, just to be sure, at least when the property is small.

A better test looks at how the server reacts when receiving an update
where a property is missing that the server currently has: if the client
supports the property, the server should remove its copy of the
property. If the client doesn't, the server should keep its copy.

> I will now try deploying syncevo as a server and try synncing with this.

https://syncevolution.org/wiki/http-server-howto


-- 
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]
https://lists.syncevolution.org/mailman/listinfo/syncevolution

Reply via email to