Den 21. feb. 2014 19:54, skrev Graham Cobb:
So, I am obviously confused. It seems that in both the webdav and
activesync cases, we are specifying a folder (which must be in a
particular user's account) in the source, but we are not specifying the
access control for that account in the source.
I only have experience with WebDAV, but I don't see a problem. That is
just like how SyncML works: each source specifies a database, but the
credentials are in the sync config that the source belongs to (the
target-config, in this case). That way, contacts, calendars, tasks, etc,
on the same server can share the same credentials. There's no reason you
should need to specify the credentials more than once for the same peer.
Wouldn't it be more
logical to either:
1) Keep database as is, and use databaseUser/databasePassword for the
access control, or
In my opinion, no, for the reasons above.
2) Modify the database to only specify the folder name and put the
username, password and url in the peer?
By what do you mean "peer"? I thought that, by sync config, you already
meant the peer. Then this is more or less how it's already done (except
for the url mangling, but I think the current system is more flexible
the way it is, and doesn't need changing).
However, if, by peer, you mean to take them out of the target-config and
into the main config, then I think that's a bad idea. By keeping them in
the target-config, it is possible for SyncEvolution to act as a sync
bridge between different remote services, such as between two WebDAV
servers, or between ActiveSync and WebDAV, or between SyncML and
WebDAV/ActiveSync, and so on.