[dev] [commits] Horde branch master updated. f8e4ae158a913be0e58c22d489101e197f4248b0

[Michael J Rubinsky]

On Jun 30, 2011, at 3:46 AM, Jan Schneider <jan at horde.org> wrote:

> 
> Zitat von "Michael J. Rubinsky" <mrubinsk at horde.org>:
> 
>> The branch "master" has been updated.
>> The following is a summary of the commits.
>> 
>> from: 49f6fd0ccea39dd1c751dfc6611c70e01e82bdc0
>> 
>> f8e4ae1 Allow syncing of multiple owner-owned calendars.
>> 
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> commit f8e4ae158a913be0e58c22d489101e197f4248b0
>> Author: Michael J Rubinsky <mrubinsk at horde.org>
>> Date:   Thu Jun 30 00:47:05 2011 -0400
>> 
>>    Allow syncing of multiple owner-owned calendars.
>> 
>>    Events from all owner-owned internal calendars can now be included
>>    in syncing operations. Controllable via user pref. New events on
>>    sync clients will always be added to user's default calendar...and there
>>    is no visual distinction of different calendars on the client
> 
> Awesome! What's the reason for only allowing synchronization of user's own calendars though?

It's mostly to avoid problems with multiple copies of the same event in different calendars. Could probably filter these out while sending and only allow editing the copy on the user's own calendar in this case, but that adds a lot complexity and overhead for querying for duplicate events on each sync transaction.

Another reason - since the calendar is not owned by you, access might change in the future. If you are suddenly given read only access, or even have your access removed, you still have copies of the events on your device. The user would need to know enough to remove the sync state via the Horde UI (or reset the account on the device) to force a folder refresh (or a slow sync in syncml).

Also, since there is NO way on the client to indicate multiple calendar sources, no distinction between sources, it wouldn't be obvious that an event is not an event on one if your own calendars. I know this reason might seem a bit weak, but I feel it could cause confusion if viewing a number of non-owned calendars along side each other.

Mike
>