Re: SyncML

On Wed, 02 Jan 2002 22:54:54 -0600 (CST)
Brent Theisen <brentt_at_ill-logic.org> wrote:
> Quoting Alan Cox <alan_at_lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>:
> > > library/client/server/engine? The reference toolkit released by the
> > > SyncML Initiative appears to be licensed
> > >(http://www.syncml.org/php/licence.php3)
> > > under a BSD style license. If this sort of license is unacceptable,
> I have
> > I had a dig. Its under a BSD license because you have to license
> > patents to implement syncml and do so under as yet undecided terms.
> That is unfortunate. The "SyncML Intellectual Property/Patent Issues"

It is, indeed.
What are "open" standards good for if they cannot be used real _open_
(i.e. freely)?

[...]
> This really sucks. The only so called standard for data synchronization
> (that I
> know of) can not be used.
>
> So now what? I don't feel like implementing a brand new synchronization
> protocol from scratch and then trying to get application developers to
> adopt it.
> However if this is what it will take to have a free synchronization
> solution
> for Linux then so be it, I'll try.
> Anybody have an idea how we can solve the synchronization problem?

Some use rsync, like the Agenda VR3.
But this has new side effects.
AFAIK most data that will be stored on out PDAs will be binary data that
will be interpreted in host byte order and with other host restrictions
(like on the iPaq the stronger alignment that the ARM CPU does compared to
x86). This makes binary data not that portable, especially a SQLite
database for example will not be readable on the x86 sync partner side.
At least a fast backup could be done using rsync...

> Brent
CU
  nils faerber

-- 
kernel concepts          Tel: +49-271-771091-12
Dreisbachstr. 24         Fax: +49-271-771091-19
D-57250 Netphen          D1 : +49-170-2729106
--