On Thu, 2014-07-31 at 17:29 +0200, Thomas Pequet wrote:
> Le 28/07/2014 10:43, Patrick Ohly a écrit :
> > Hello Thomas!
> Hello Patrick
> >
> > I am currently testing the following change in SyncEvolution:
> >
> > commit 662aab0823905d56edf812cf5bf2464379fdfcaf
> > Author: Patrick Ohly <[email protected]>
> > Date:   Wed Jul 23 14:07:13 2014 +0200
> >
> >      EDS: memo syncing as iCalendar 2.0 (FDO #52714)
> >      
> >      When syncing memos with a peer which also supports iCalendar 2.0 as
> >      data format, the engine will now pick iCalendar 2.0 instead of
> >      converting to/from plain text. The advantage is that some additional
> >      properties like start date and categories can also be synchronized.
> >      
> >      The code is a lot simpler, too, because the EDS specific iCalendar 2.0
> >      <-> text conversion code can be removed.
> >
> > With Memotoo that only works partially. Adding a new note on the server
> > using iCalendar 2.0 as format works. Updating it fails: the server seems
> > to ignore the new data.
> >
> > I also noticed that the server sends broken CtCap if (and only if!) the
> > client mentions iCalendar 2.0. Memotoo then lists
> > <Rx-Pref><CTType>text/calendar</CTType> and
> > <Rx><CTType>text/plain</CTType> but then describes some unrelated
> > <CTCap><CTType>text/x-vnote</CTType>
> Ok thanks Patrick for this bug :)
> I have corrected this problem. Tell me if it is not OK.

I can confirm that the CtCap is okay now. However, the main problem of
memo updates in text/calendar format getting ignored by the server still
exists.

Latest logs here:
https://nightly.syncevolution.org/2014-07-31-11-21_testing-amd64_memotoo_eds_memo/testing-amd64/39-memotoo/

> > Here's the sync where a note gets updated:
> > https://nightly.syncevolution.org/2014-07-25-22-25_all/testing-amd64/39-memotoo/Client_Sync_eds_memo_testAddUpdate.recv.client.B/syncevolution-log.html
> > First message sent by client:
> > https://nightly.syncevolution.org/2014-07-25-22-25_all/testing-amd64/39-memotoo/Client_Sync_eds_memo_testAddUpdate.recv.client.B/syncevolution-log_trm001_001_outgoing.xml
> > Broken CtCap from server:
> > https://nightly.syncevolution.org/2014-07-25-22-25_all/testing-amd64/39-memotoo/Client_Sync_eds_memo_testAddUpdate.recv.client.B/syncevolution-log_trm001_002_incoming.xml
> > Update sent by client:
> > https://nightly.syncevolution.org/2014-07-25-22-25_all/testing-amd64/39-memotoo/Client_Sync_eds_memo_testAddUpdate.update.client.A/syncevolution-log_trm002_003_outgoing.xml
> >
> > This is what a second client then later gets:
> > https://nightly.syncevolution.org/2014-07-25-22-25_all/testing-amd64/39-memotoo/Client_Sync_eds_memo_testAddUpdate.recv.client.B/syncevolution-log.html
> > https://nightly.syncevolution.org/2014-07-25-22-25_all/testing-amd64/39-memotoo/Client_Sync_eds_memo_testAddUpdate.recv.client.B/syncevolution-log_trm003_006_incoming.xml
> >

-- 
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