[Kde-pim] SyncML meeting - conclusions

[Patrick Ohly]

On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 14:39 +0200, Riccardo Iaconelli wrote:
> On Friday 04 June 2010 13:58:07 Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > I also disagree with many of your statements. More often than not, they
> > seem to be based on a desire to advertise your solution and get it
> > approved as the official KDE solution.
> 
> Fortunately I don't need anything special to be officially recognized as part 
> of KDE.
> 
> My solution is just an empty shell, an interface with several backends. I 
> don't really see how it conflicts with your work,

I'd like to ensure that KDE ends up with a good solution. I personally
think that SyncEvolution and Synthesis have a lot to offer, but of
course it's everyones' right to make up their own mind about that.

>  or how your mail is relevant 
> at all, at this point.

I'm just pointing out that there is no consensus on "use Akunambol as
main KDE syncing solution" and that it is not just Sascha who disagrees
with your email. If I hadn't said anything, one might have concluded
that I agree with this "consensus".

I do agree that reusing GUI work would be nice, but it seems that this
is largely theoretic and won't work in practice. Anyway, I'll leave that
to the people actually working on that code.
 
-- 
Bye, Patrick Ohly
--  
Patrick.Ohly at gmx.de
http://www.estamos.de/


_______________________________________________
KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim at kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/