On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 12:30 -0400, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 09:17 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Mi, 2011-09-07 at 17:48 -0400, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
> Let me phrase the question differently: if the options for "--sync" aka
> "--source-property sync" had been named as follows, would that have
> avoided the problem?
>
> $ syncevolution --sync ?
> --sync
> Requests a certain synchronization mode when initiating a sync:
> two-way = only send/receive changes since last sync
> slow = exchange all items
> refresh-from-remote = discard all local items and replace with
> the items on the peer
> refresh-from-local = discard all items on the peer and replace
> with the local items
> one-way-from-remote = transmit changes from peer
> one-way-from-local = transmit local changes
> disabled (or none) = synchronization disabled
>
> refresh/one-way-from-server/client are also supported. Their use is
> discouraged because the direction of the data transfer depends
> on the role of the local side (can be server or client), which is
> not always obvious.
>
> When accepting a sync session in a SyncML server (HTTP server), only
> sources with sync != disabled are made available to the client,
> which chooses the final sync mode based on its own configuration.
> When accepting a sync session in a SyncML client (local sync with
> the server contacting SyncEvolution on a device), the sync mode
> specified in the client is typically overridden by the server.
Yes, this explains the situation quite clearly - I think this is a clear
improvement.
Created
https://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=23537 to track the
proposal. It's too late for 1.2, so I made the warning about this
problem a bit more prominent in the 1.2 README.
--
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.