Re: SyncML

On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 02:40:14PM +0100, Nils Faerber wrote:
> > well, syncml is only a few months old and the first software using it
> > is just appearing. I wouldn't necessarily say it's an established
> > standard, yet.
> But they aim at beeing "the" standard :(

everyone who comes up with something new does. let's see how they fare
before jumping on THAT ship.

> This is basically a good idea but not beeing real open (i.e. free) means a
> no-go for many possible applications especially open source applications.
> Maybe they could be talked into something that it can be freely used in
> non-profit applications.

I don't know about you, but I personally don't oppose commercial
software. I prefer free software for many reasons, but I wouldn't want
to discriminate against the more primitive way on such a low level.

> > if we agree to use an SQL backend, then db dumps in SQL format seem to
> > be the most portable way to go and are fully rsync compatabile. as an
> > alternative, we could sync the transaction logs or go with timestamps
> > (select * from addresses where last_update > X).
> Wouldn't dumps imply that you first have to do the dump into some local
> file before you can rsync it?

yes, temporarily. I believe that much temp memory should be there.

also, it may or may not be possible to dump into a pipe.

-- 
http://web.lemuria.org/pubkey.html
pub  1024D/D88D35A6 2001-11-14 Tom Vogt <tom@lemuria.org>
     Key fingerprint = 276B B7BB E4D8 FCCE DB8F  F965 310B 811A D88D 35A6