[Synckolab] Re: bug-report for version 0.4.24

Niko Berger niko.berger at corinis.com
Mon Sep 11 12:52:32 EDT 2006

I got all the patches and already implemented most of it. I will give out a
new version (with the nice conflict resolution dialog) today...

What do you mean with updates that get deleted?

Fyi: how the sync is resolved (aleady posted a few times):
On every sync an internal database (local) will be updated that hols the
hash of the current entry. so for each entry i can make the following

internal entry == tbird entry -> internal != imap entry ---> update
internal+tbird with imap
internal entry != tbird entry  -> internal == imap entry ---> update
imap+internal with tbird
internal entry != tbird entry != imap entry --> ask what to do and act


-----Original Message-----
From: synckolab-bounces at mozdev.org [mailto:synckolab-bounces at mozdev.org] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Montag, 11. September 2006 01:28
To: synckolab at mozdev.org
Subject: Re: [Synckolab] Re: bug-report for version 0.4.24


I am just adding my 2 cents:

> - There are problems when I use the field for the second mail address.
    I have noticed this too as well as submitted a fix to Niko that resolves
it.  The pager number also does not sync in version 0.4.24

I have also seen updates records gets deleted and then return on next sync.
Not exactly sure what causes this to happen.

It would be nice to see the sync process complete faster, however, I think
thats a great thing to do after the project gets to 1.0.  A reliable sync is
better then a fast unreliable sync.


T.Peichl wrote:
> Hi again,
> I just wanted to add further information on my last report:
> > - There are problems when I use the field for the second mail address.
> > When syncing those records loose the second mail address after a
> second run
> > cause it doesn't get stored on the server vCard. Sometimes those
> records even get completely lost.
> Here I mixed things up those are actually two issues that are not 
> related.
> - The field for the second email address does not get stored in the 
> server sided vCard.
> The consequence is that one looses all information in that field, caus 
> a later sync will notice that as a local change and remove that field 
> locally, too.
> - Sometimes when sync processes changed vCards, it marks the old ones 
> as deleted but does not completely rewrite the new cards. If you purge 
> your mailfolder to remove the messages marked as deleted, you lose 
> those records. If you don't sync kolab gets just further confused, 
> because it also processes the vCards marked as deleted which leads to 
> the multiplication of identical records.
> > - Another problem seems to exist when updating records on the server
> side.
> > In my testrun I changed 24 records which where correctly noticed,
> but while
> > writing those all were deleted but only 3 of them actually rewritten.
> This belongs to point two above.
> > Another thing I noticed is that it takes quite some time to go over
> all those
> > records when updating. Maybe you could consider using an additional
> special
> > mail where the last hash table (like the one stored in the local
> thunderbird profile)
> > is stored, so an update check only needs to read one mail and then
> just react
> > upon changes.
> A further suggestions would be to use the contact's names in the 
> subject instead of the pure unique ID. It would help finding mail 
> addresses from within webmail applications.
> Another interesting feature would be to also synchronize my firefox 
> bookmarks.
> I guess this is not really related to contacts/calendar but this would 
> be really great and I think it would be a good way to do so, cause I 
> don't want to configure an additional IMAP access from within a 
> firefox plugin.
> Sincerely yours
> T.Peichl
> _______________________________________________
> Synckolab mailing list
> Synckolab at mozdev.org
> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/synckolab
Synckolab mailing list
Synckolab at mozdev.org

More information about the Synckolab mailing list