Re: [SyncEvolution] [Opensync-devel] OpenSync: fragmentation is harmful
Hi Lukas,
On 01/05/11 16:26, Lukas Zeller wrote:
I mean, even we had perfect integration of SyncML, CalDAV, ActiveSync
etc. today, I feel it would still not cover everyday sync needs I
have today, let alone in the future. With the explosion of endpoints
(devices) on one side and data sources (services, databases) on the
other I doubt that point-to-point sync has a bright future. I have
the impression what we need could be more similar to git than to
SyncML.
I have the same feeling and therefore I created a playground - OldSync.
This is just a technology study. The idea was that there are some
basically good ideas like pipes, workflows and distributed repositories
(hg, mercurial) which preserve a history.
The idea was that every sync is a peer-to-peer sync but I always
synchronized a device or the filesystem with a filesystem. If the data
is in a repository (git, mercurial) then you have a backup and you can
synchronize in a distributed way (native git/hg push/pull).
Additionally such systems have a very flexible diff backends. So you
need normalization but not always an own merger (at minimum for text
based data).
This is of course vague thinking and far from anything realizable in
short term. But when talking about combining efforts, I think we need
also to talk about the big context for all this.
I had just a rough idea too. I only want to express that I have the same
impression like you.
Best regards
Michael
--
___________________________________________________________________
Michael Bell Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin
Tel.: +49 (0)30-2093 70143 ZE Computer- und Medienservice
Fax: +49 (0)30-2093 70135 Unter den Linden 6
michael.bell(a)cms.hu-berlin.de D-10099 Berlin
___________________________________________________________________
PGP Fingerprint: 09E4 3D29 4156 2774 0F2C C643 D8BD 1918 2030 5AAB
Attachments:
- smime.p7s (application/pkcs7-signature — 5.9 KB)