4:08 p.m.
Hello!
So when do we want to release 0.9? I think we should give it at least
another week, so that users have a chance to download the source and/or
binaries and provide feedback.
That's a lower bound. If we want to include support for ZYB.com and
mobical.net, then it might take longer. ScheduleWorld sync has known
issues which Mark is slow to comment on and there's one open Funambol
issue.
Yongsheng, what's your estimate how long the testing with mobical.net
might take until we are at the usual level (testing passes without a
hitch, known issues documented)? And for ZYB.com (assuming that ZYB
comments on the anchor problem)?
A rough figure is enough, and no need to hurry: I don't consider these
critical for 0.9.
Any comments whether additional servers are worth waiting with the
release? Are there deadlines (distros?) that we should know about?
--
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.
4:19 p.m.
Yongsheng, what's your estimate how long the testing with
mobical.net
might take until we are at the usual level (testing passes without a
hitch, known issues documented)? And for ZYB.com (assuming that ZYB
comments on the anchor problem)?
ZYB:
Since it declares only to support contacts, it will take no longer than 2 days in case of
comments from ZYB for others have done.
Mobical:
Mobical supports contacts, calendar, task and notes. 4 formats of PIM have many issues I
summarized up on moblin bugzilla and I think they need 1~1.5 week to make mobical ready.
Regards,
Yongsheng
-----Original Message-----
From: syncevolution-bounces(a)syncevolution.org
[mailto:syncevolution-bounces@syncevolution.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Ohly
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 8:08 PM
To: SyncEvolution
Subject: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 final: when and what?
Hello!
So when do we want to release 0.9? I think we should give it at least
another week, so that users have a chance to download the source and/or
binaries and provide feedback.
That's a lower bound. If we want to include support for ZYB.com and
mobical.net, then it might take longer. ScheduleWorld sync has known
issues which Mark is slow to comment on and there's one open Funambol
issue.
Yongsheng, what's your estimate how long the testing with mobical.net
might take until we are at the usual level (testing passes without a
hitch, known issues documented)? And for ZYB.com (assuming that ZYB
comments on the anchor problem)?
A rough figure is enough, and no need to hurry: I don't consider these
critical for 0.9.
Any comments whether additional servers are worth waiting with the
release? Are there deadlines (distros?) that we should know about?
--
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
SyncEvolution(a)syncevolution.org
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
4:36 p.m.
Hello,
maybe this is a bit off-topic and also I am not a SyncEvolution or even
a Moblin developer but I am following this list for a while now and have
some comments.
I would like to suggest to support some more free-available servers that
everyone is able to install on their own root-servers or web-space
accounts. I think of Kolab/Horde or maybe also eGroupWare. They have
their own syncml implementation ready and also already included. This
would be a great, and in case of eGroupWare also simple, solution for
people who do not want to give their sensitive Data out of their hands
to google or others.
Cheers Stephan
Am Montag, den 27.07.2009, 14:08 +0200 schrieb Patrick Ohly:
Hello!
So when do we want to release 0.9? I think we should give it at least
another week, so that users have a chance to download the source and/or
binaries and provide feedback.
That's a lower bound. If we want to include support for ZYB.com and
mobical.net, then it might take longer. ScheduleWorld sync has known
issues which Mark is slow to comment on and there's one open Funambol
issue.
Yongsheng, what's your estimate how long the testing with mobical.net
might take until we are at the usual level (testing passes without a
hitch, known issues documented)? And for ZYB.com (assuming that ZYB
comments on the anchor problem)?
A rough figure is enough, and no need to hurry: I don't consider these
critical for 0.9.
Any comments whether additional servers are worth waiting with the
release? Are there deadlines (distros?) that we should know about?
6:06 p.m.
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 13:36 +0100, Stephan Schulz wrote:
maybe this is a bit off-topic and also I am not a SyncEvolution or
even
a Moblin developer but I am following this list for a while now and have
some comments.
Welcome! Please, keep commenting. Such feedback is very valuable.
I would like to suggest to support some more free-available servers
that
everyone is able to install on their own root-servers or web-space
accounts. I think of Kolab/Horde or maybe also eGroupWare. They have
their own syncml implementation ready and also already included. This
would be a great, and in case of eGroupWare also simple, solution for
people who do not want to give their sensitive Data out of their hands
to google or others.
I've tried to work with the at least one of the two before. I think it
was eGroupware, because at some point I was actively testing against it
(see syncevolution.org compatibility page). None of developers at that
time ever replied to my emails. Trying to support a server where the
developers are either completely uninterested or have left the project
is a waste of time, so I stopped testing against eGroupware.
Do you think the situation is different today?
Are you sure that both Horde and eGroupware have their own SyncML
implementation? I think that at some point at least one if the suites
switched to Funambol. We'd still have to test against that, because even
if the engine is the same, the data handling is likely to be very
different from myFunambol.com
Finally, is either of these suites really easy to install? Our own plan
to simplify the situation for casual users is to implement the SyncML
server role ourselves. This would be without web interface, but could be
made to run on a shared server without installation, without root
access, just via ssh.
--
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.
1:19 p.m.
Hi
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 14:08 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
and there's one open Funambol issue.
which issue is still pending? Also, against which server did you test
it? Is this issue still present on the v8 Release Candidate? The RC
files are on http://forge.ow2.org/project/showfiles.php?group_id=96 and
the GA is expected in days now. If it helps you to know, myFUNAMBOL will
be migrated to v8 not sooner than the end of August.
Cheers
stef
--
Funambol Community manager :: https://www.forge.funambol.org
Follow the tweets: http://twitter.com/funambol
Funambol Identi.ca group: http://identi.ca/group/funambol
1:42 p.m.
I think it should be this one I am working on.
https://core.forge.funambol.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=405&dsMes...
http://forge.ow2.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=314098&gro...
Below is our bug entry in moblin.org to track this issue.
http://bugzilla.moblin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4598
Regards,
Yongsheng
-----Original Message-----
From: syncevolution-bounces(a)syncevolution.org
[mailto:syncevolution-bounces@syncevolution.org] On Behalf Of Stefano Maffulli
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 5:20 PM
To: Ohly, Patrick
Cc: SyncEvolution
Subject: Re: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 final: when and what?
Hi
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 14:08 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
and there's one open Funambol issue.
which issue is still pending? Also, against which server did you test
it? Is this issue still present on the v8 Release Candidate? The RC
files are on http://forge.ow2.org/project/showfiles.php?group_id=96 and
the GA is expected in days now. If it helps you to know, myFUNAMBOL will
be migrated to v8 not sooner than the end of August.
Cheers
stef
--
Funambol Community manager :: https://www.forge.funambol.org
Follow the tweets: http://twitter.com/funambol
Funambol Identi.ca group: http://identi.ca/group/funambol
_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
SyncEvolution(a)syncevolution.org
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
8:36 p.m.
Thank you Yongsheng, I'll push this internally. Feel free to ping me
again if you don't hear from Funambol in a couple of days.
Cheers
stef
On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 17:42 +0800, Zhu, Yongsheng wrote:
I think it should be this one I am working on.
https://core.forge.funambol.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=405&dsMes...
http://forge.ow2.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=314098&gro...
Below is our bug entry in moblin.org to track this issue.
http://bugzilla.moblin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4598
Regards,
Yongsheng
-----Original Message-----
From: syncevolution-bounces(a)syncevolution.org
[mailto:syncevolution-bounces@syncevolution.org] On Behalf Of Stefano Maffulli
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 5:20 PM
To: Ohly, Patrick
Cc: SyncEvolution
Subject: Re: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 final: when and what?
Hi
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 14:08 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> and there's one open Funambol issue.
which issue is still pending? Also, against which server did you test
it? Is this issue still present on the v8 Release Candidate? The RC
files are on http://forge.ow2.org/project/showfiles.php?group_id=96 and
the GA is expected in days now. If it helps you to know, myFUNAMBOL will
be migrated to v8 not sooner than the end of August.
Cheers
stef
--
Funambol Community manager :: https://www.forge.funambol.org
Follow the tweets: http://twitter.com/funambol
Funambol Identi.ca group: http://identi.ca/group/funambol
1:58 p.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 + Funambol (was: Re: 0.9 final: when and what?)
Hello Stefano!
Good to see you here :-)
On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 10:19 +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
Hi
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 14:08 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> and there's one open Funambol issue.
which issue is still pending?
http://bugzilla.moblin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4598
Funambol: Company phone property will lost in syncing addressbook with
funambol
The server sends TEL;TYPE="X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY" to the client, which is
not something that is currently recognized. As Yongsheng said in the bug
report, this is an Evolution extension for "company phone number", in
contrast to the normal work or "business phone number".
There are several issues related to it, ranging from parsing problems to
the server not understanding the TYPE. I think it would be best if the
server used TYPE=WORK instead of TYPE="X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY".
Also, against which server did you test
it? Is this issue still present on the v8 Release Candidate?
We testing with myFUNAMBOL.
The RC
files are on http://forge.ow2.org/project/showfiles.php?group_id=96 and
the GA is expected in days now.
I downloaded that and grepped for X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY. Ah, it is in
config/com/funambol/server/engine/pipeline/phones-support/bsh/SyncEvolutionin.bsh:
/**
* Remaps the following properties:
* TEL;X-EVOLUTION-UI-SLOT=;TYPE=PREF into TEL;VOICE
* TEL;X-EVOLUTION-UI-SLOT=;TYPE=VOICE into TEL;PREF;VOICE
* TEL;X-EVOLUTION-UI-SLOT=;TYPE=\"X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY\" into
TEL;WORK;PREF
* @param data the data to process
*
* @return the modified data
*/
void preProcessContact(Item i) {
data = i.data.data;
data = replaceInProperty(data, "TEL;X-EVOLUTION-UI-SLOT=\\d;TYPE=PREF"
, "TEL;VOICE" );
data = replaceInProperty(data, "TEL;X-EVOLUTION-UI-SLOT=\\d;TYPE=VOICE"
, "TEL;PREF;VOICE");
data = replaceInProperty(data,
"TEL;X-EVOLUTION-UI-SLOT=\\d;TYPE=\"X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY\"",
"TEL;WORK;PREF" );
i.data.data = data;
}
I remember that we had a discussion once about Funambol putting TEL;PREF
into the "other" phone number in the web and using TEL;OTHER as the main
phone number. I still think that this reverses the logic, but apparently
it was necessary for some other clients:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.mobile.funambol.devel/3210
Is the Synclet mapping bidirectional, in other words, does it work for
incoming and outgoing items?
I think the mapping for X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY should be removed. I don't
remember whether we discussed this in the past and a mail search didn't
bring it up.
Can you ask the myFUNAMBOL developers/admins about this? Filing bug
reports or mailing the lists often doesn't get prompt (or any) reply.
For example, the "lost ACTION" email hasn't drawn any response. We've
got a workaround though, so that isn't relevant anymore, except perhaps
for other clients.
If it helps you to know, myFUNAMBOL will
be migrated to v8 not sooner than the end of August.
I definitely hope that we'll release 0.9 sooner than that ;-) So let's
focus on the current v7 release. We can retest and update
test/README.funambol and the corresponding Compatibility page entry once
v8 is roled out.
--
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.
9:16 p.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 + Funambol (was: Re: 0.9 final: when and what?)
On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 11:58 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
I downloaded that and grepped for X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY. Ah, it is in
config/com/funambol/server/engine/pipeline/phones-support/bsh/SyncEvolutionin.bsh:
[...]
I remember that we had a discussion once about Funambol putting
TEL;PREF
into the "other" phone number in the web and using TEL;OTHER as the main
phone number. I still think that this reverses the logic, but apparently
it was necessary for some other clients:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.mobile.funambol.devel/3210
Is the Synclet mapping bidirectional, in other words, does it work for
incoming and outgoing items?
I don't think they're bidirectional, but I'm not 100% sure. There are
two files, called SyncEvolutionout.bsh and SyncEvolutionin.bsh, which
leads me to think that the mapping is done one direction at the time:
https://core.forge.funambol.org/source/browse/core/trunk/funambol/modules...
https://core.forge.funambol.org/source/browse/core/trunk/funambol/modules...
Since this file is specific for syncevolution, you may want to modify
the mapping in it and see if it solves your problem.
I think the mapping for X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY should be removed. I
don't
remember whether we discussed this in the past and a mail search didn't
bring it up.
It's a synclet specific for Evolution: you're more expert than us to
modify the mapping. Feel free to play around and send the updated bsh to
Funambol for testing.
Can you ask the myFUNAMBOL developers/admins about this? Filing bug
reports or mailing the lists often doesn't get prompt (or any) reply.
For example, the "lost ACTION" email hasn't drawn any response. We've
got a workaround though, so that isn't relevant anymore, except perhaps
for other clients.
I apologize for not receiving a response. For the future, if you guys
have important issues that you feel should be taken into consideration
please cc me. Also, don't forget to post to dev(a)forge.funambol.org, too:
that list has less traffic and gets more attention.
/stef
--
Funambol Community manager :: https://www.forge.funambol.org
Follow the tweets: http://twitter.com/funambol
Funambol Identi.ca group: http://identi.ca/group/funambol
9:53 p.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 + Funambol (was: Re: 0.9 final: when and what?)
On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 18:16 +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 11:58 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
Since this file is specific for syncevolution, you may want to modify
the mapping in it and see if it solves your problem.
> I think the mapping for X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY should be removed. I don't
> remember whether we discussed this in the past and a mail search didn't
> bring it up.
It's a synclet specific for Evolution: you're more expert than us to
modify the mapping. Feel free to play around and send the updated bsh to
Funambol for testing.
Yongsheng, is this something you can have a look at? You would have to
install the Funambol server locally.
> Can you ask the myFUNAMBOL developers/admins about this? Filing
bug
> reports or mailing the lists often doesn't get prompt (or any) reply.
> For example, the "lost ACTION" email hasn't drawn any response.
We've
> got a workaround though, so that isn't relevant anymore, except perhaps
> for other clients.
I apologize for not receiving a response. For the future, if you guys
have important issues that you feel should be taken into consideration
please cc me. Also, don't forget to post to dev(a)forge.funambol.org, too:
that list has less traffic and gets more attention.
But aren't we as users of Funambol supposed to stay of that list so that
the traffic remains low and the core developers can use it for their
internal discussions? ;-) Or has the definition of the lists changed
without me noticing it?
--
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.
10:03 p.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 + Funambol (was: Re: 0.9 final: when and what?)
On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 19:53 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
But aren't we as users of Funambol supposed to stay of that list
so
that the traffic remains low and the core developers can use it for
their internal discussions? ;-) Or has the definition of the lists
changed without me noticing it?
Nothing changed. The rule of thumb is that if you have commit status on
Funambol svn you can post there (you should still have it, btw: do you
still need it?) The description says:
You should post on this list if you are a core contributor or
are very familiar with Funambol development and want to discuss
very technical topics, contribution ideas and so on. It is not a
support list.
The intention is to discourage newcomers from posting there. You and
other syncevolution developers are considered expert of syncml
development so your posts about development plans, bugs and issues are
generally welcome.
cheers
stef
--
Funambol Community manager :: https://www.forge.funambol.org
Follow the tweets: http://twitter.com/funambol
Funambol Identi.ca group: http://identi.ca/group/funambol
11:49 p.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 + Funambol (was: Re: 0.9 final: when and what?)
On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 19:53 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 18:16 +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 11:58 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> Since this file is specific for syncevolution, you may want to modify
> the mapping in it and see if it solves your problem.
>
> > I think the mapping for X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY should be removed. I don't
> > remember whether we discussed this in the past and a mail search didn't
> > bring it up.
>
> It's a synclet specific for Evolution: you're more expert than us to
> modify the mapping. Feel free to play around and send the updated bsh to
> Funambol for testing.
Yongsheng, is this something you can have a look at? You would have to
install the Funambol server locally.
After thinking about this some more I noticed that we cannot test this
well without help by Funambol: as long as the mapping is bidirectional,
our tests (copy from SyncEvolution to server to SyncEvolution) will
pass, even if the mapping is wrong and the data is stored incorrectly on
the server.
If the storage on the server can be verified manually, we might be able
to check that the mapping works, but then we are still not 100% sure
that the web interface agrees with our interpretation of the server
data.
Is there a chance to get the X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY line removed from the
two .bsh files on the internal development server? Then we could test it
with the web interface before making that change permanent.
--
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.
10:23 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 + Funambol (was: Re: 0.9 final: when and what?)
Yongsheng, is this something you can have a look at? You would have
to
install the Funambol server locally.
I've installed the Funambol 8.0RC server
and tried to understand its behaviors. I could also use web page to create contact though
there are some differences from myFunambol. Two bsh files are only used to filter incoming
and outgoing messages from syncevolution client. They are strictly string-matched.
'X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY' doesn't occur in other places so I think it is only used
in in/out message processing. That means myFunambol's webpage should not generate
'X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY' type. I'm not 100% sure but tests with my local funambol
server could prove it partly.
Stef,
To be convenient, I attach 2 bsh files in the mail.
Patrick,
your suggestion to remove 2 lines seems to me ok and reasonable for 'work' and
'x-evolution-company' are different types. We can add this limitation in current
readme and remove it after Funambol's next update on this.
Regards,
Yongsheng
-----Original Message-----
From: syncevolution-bounces(a)syncevolution.org
[mailto:syncevolution-bounces@syncevolution.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Ohly
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:49 AM
To: Stefano Maffulli
Cc: SyncEvolution
Subject: Re: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 + Funambol (was: Re: 0.9 final: when and what?)
On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 19:53 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 18:16 +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 11:58 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > Since this file is specific for syncevolution, you may want to modify
> > the mapping in it and see if it solves your problem.
> >
> > > I think the mapping for X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY should be removed. I don't
> > > remember whether we discussed this in the past and a mail search
didn't
> > > bring it up.
> >
> > It's a synclet specific for Evolution: you're more expert than us to
> > modify the mapping. Feel free to play around and send the updated bsh to
> > Funambol for testing.
>
Yongsheng, is this something you can have a look at? You would have
to
install the Funambol server locally.
After thinking about this some more I noticed that we cannot test this
well without help by Funambol: as long as the mapping is bidirectional,
our tests (copy from SyncEvolution to server to SyncEvolution) will
pass, even if the mapping is wrong and the data is stored incorrectly on
the server.
If the storage on the server can be verified manually, we might be able
to check that the mapping works, but then we are still not 100% sure
that the web interface agrees with our interpretation of the server
data.
Is there a chance to get the X-EVOLUTION-COMPANY line removed from the
two .bsh files on the internal development server? Then we could test it
with the web interface before making that change permanent.
--
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
SyncEvolution(a)syncevolution.org
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
11:45 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 + Funambol (was: Re: 0.9 final: when and what?)
Hello Yongsheng
On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 14:23 +0800, Zhu, Yongsheng wrote:
Stef,
To be convenient, I attach 2 bsh files in the mail.
Just to be super sure: do you want me to send these two bsh to Funambol
developers for testing? If so, I can create an issue for the portal
(myFunambol) and push internally for testing it asap. I'll also try to
make sure you can use our internal server we use for testing the new
version of the portal.
/stef
--
Funambol Community manager :: https://www.forge.funambol.org
Follow the tweets: http://twitter.com/funambol
Funambol Identi.ca group: http://identi.ca/group/funambol
11:48 a.m.
New subject: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 + Funambol (was: Re: 0.9 final: when and what?)
Stef,
Just to be super sure: do you want me to send these two bsh to
Funambol
developers for testing?
That would be great.
If so, I can create an issue for the portal
(myFunambol) and push internally for testing it asap. I'll also try to
make sure you can use our internal server we use for testing the new
version of the portal.
That's what we really need. Thank you for help.
Regards,
Yongsheng
-----Original Message-----
From: Stefano Maffulli [mailto:maffulli@funambol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:45 PM
To: Zhu, Yongsheng
Cc: Ohly, Patrick; SyncEvolution
Subject: RE: [SyncEvolution] 0.9 + Funambol (was: Re: 0.9 final: when and what?)
Hello Yongsheng
On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 14:23 +0800, Zhu, Yongsheng wrote:
Stef,
To be convenient, I attach 2 bsh files in the mail.
Just to be super sure: do you want me to send these two bsh to Funambol
developers for testing? If so, I can create an issue for the portal
(myFunambol) and push internally for testing it asap. I'll also try to
make sure you can use our internal server we use for testing the new
version of the portal.
/stef
--
Funambol Community manager :: https://www.forge.funambol.org
Follow the tweets: http://twitter.com/funambol
Funambol Identi.ca group: http://identi.ca/group/funambol
4193
days inactive
4195
days old
syncevolution@synevolution.org
14 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Patrick Ohly -
Stefano Maffulli -
Stephan Schulz -
Zhu, Yongsheng