On 10/04/2014 12:11:34, "Patrick Ohly" <[email protected]> wrote:
>and two sync configs representing peers (P1@Ctx, P2@Ctx). Then
>there are a a bunch of objects as in this matrix:
In which, just to see if I understand this correctly, P1@Ctx
describes
how peer P1 can access S1/2/3.
The full line for P1@Ctx describes how P1 syncs:
P1 here is a peer then, and P1@Ctx (aka a sync config) describes within
Ctx exhaustively how P1 can sync in Ctx? Or could a single peer
(sensibly) have multiple of these within a single context?
the Xmn boxes describe
how it access the respective source (basically the "sync" mode) and the
last column has the sync properties for the peer.
So: P1@Ctx has sync config properties that describe all relevant sync
properties for the peer except the sync mode of that peer with any
single data source within that context, which is held by the Xmn entity.
If so, for the sake of current discussion, I would propose to call that
SyncMode.
From the perspective of the configuration system, "target-config" is
just another sync config and thus another line in the diagram. Nothing
stops you from setting a "sync" property in one of the Xmn boxes. But
these values are not used and therefore don't make sense there. Perhaps
this can be visualized like this:
But above you said that Xmn specifically holds the "sync" mode. Is this
different from the "sync" property?
My data visualizing skills are non-existent, so I've resorted to the
only tool I know in this domain: SQL. Could you guys have a look at
http://reichenhack.github.io/syncevolution-model.html to see if this is
going somewhere?
Regards,
Emile
_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.syncevolution.org/mailman/listinfo/syncevolution
