On Sun, 2014-04-13 at 23:13 +0100, Graham Cobb wrote: > On 13/04/14 21:58, Heyns Emiliano wrote: > > So... as Patrick pointed out earlier and I might now begin to grasp... > > the target-config is the receiving end of the sync pair (Patrick said > > this verbatim... I think I now understand what he means). > > local://@context always points to target-config@context, > > Yes > > > and as > > target-config@context has an property called 'uri' pointing to a data > > source in @context, we have a full specification of the second half of > > the pair. > > Not quite. If I understand correctly (Patrick?), the Xmn's for each > source within target-config@context have a uri property. So the uri in > the sending end's Xmn get matched against one of the Xmn's in the > receiving end's target-config to select the source on the receiving side.
No, "uri" on the local side gets matched against "source name" on the target side, not some other "uri" value there. "sync" gets ignored on the target side. The default sync formats are fine for SyncEvolution<->SyncEvolution syncs. So all in all the Xmns on the target side are not used at all. BTW, me might need a better name for the non-target side. "sending" is misleading, because both sides send. I tend to use "normal sync config" (see "target config" in the terminology section) but "normal" is not very descriptive. "originating sync config" perhaps? Native speakers to the rescue, please. "local" vs. "remote" gets introduced and could be used, but they can be ambiguous, too. -- 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
