On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 19:20 +0100, Lukas Zeller wrote: > On Aug 12, 2009, at 19:27 , Patrick Ohly wrote: > > I think the logic is the other way around: if first sync, then clear > > the > > anchor. At least that is what I patched in the code. "syncevolution" > > still reports "first time sync" despite the patch, so I don't think it > > broke anything. We should remove it nevertheless - after 0.9, which I > > tagged and compiled today. > > I didn't say you broke something :-)
No, but that was my fear because the code is in SyncEvolution 0.9 ;-) -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. _______________________________________________ os-libsynthesis mailing list os-libsynthesis@synthesis.ch http://lists.synthesis.ch/mailman/listinfo/os-libsynthesis
