Am Wednesday 18 January 2012 20:16:08 schrieb Ludovic Marcotte: > On 18/01/12 01:39, André Schild wrote: > > I don't see why we should drop SyncML support, it's working after all > > and a OPEN standard... > > The Problem with Activesync stuff is always the potential license > > question, what if MS will start claim license violations by Z-Push > > (Justified or not does not matter) ? > > I fully agree here about the licensing violation. > > > There already exists a sogo backend for Z-Push, a few posts ago is a > > link for download. > > I will try to make it better available, so we can work on improving it. > > We could also import it on our source repository. We did this a while > ago from the connector developed by Philipp Kewisch, but he soon after > abandoned its development. > > > The one big advantage I see of ActiveSync is, that you have only one > > setup to do for Email,Calendar,Contacts and Tasks and all traffic > > flows via HTTP(S) > > > > There are several disadvantages of ActiveSync compared to native > > Cardav/Caldav support: > > - Only ONE Calendar, Contacts and Tasks can be synched > > - Only one ActiveSync account is possible > > - Mail handling is very limited > > Indeed but it should be compared with SyncML/Funambol, not CalDAV/CardDAV. > > I would still very much like to open a discussion about this - ie., > Funambol (SyncML) backend vs. Z-Push (ActiveSync) backend. > > To offer a very good mobile experience, I feel we'll have to make a > choice and focus our efforts into one or the other. We chose Funambol > many years ago. It might have been a good choice back then but it > doesn't mean it's still the best. > > On my end (and speaking for myself only), there are some things I > dislike about Funambol such as a worthless bug tracker, patches taking > decades to get accepted (or even bugs getting acknowledged), Java-based > (enough said here), requires more resources than all other SOGo > components and requirements combined together and multiplied by your > favorite factor of the day (must be greater than 2), almost impossible > to package together with SOGo and more. > > What I mostly fear about Z-Push is that we'll revisit all the device > synchronization bugs we had over the past few years with Funambol/SyncML > and we'll have to hack around like we did. This is very valuable time > and know-how here. Getting the Z-Push connector up and running can be > done in a snap, but refining it will take some time. Also, having the > Sword of Damocles on top of my head regarding the licensing agreement > doesn't make me a happy, happy, joy man. >
Hello, despite the issues, I would very much like to see a z-push sogo or even a more general z-push caldav/carddav backend. In my experience, activesync support is more mature on the phones I experimented with, than syncml support is. And almost any phone supports it. While syncml works well in some cases, I rarely experienced really satisfying syncml support. For example, despite the work put into the sogo funambol connector, it still does not sync alarms back from a Nokia device to the server correctly (probably bug 586). If sogo switches to activesync, please keep support for syncing multiple calendars and probably also multiple address books - this is a great feature, in particular combined with the unique sync tags! Best regards Heiner -- users@sogo.nu https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
