On Monday 20 June 2011 22:22:09 kunal wrote: > Hi all, > for the last few weeks my mentor (Riccardo) and I had been evaluating > various server and client SDKs and components that we could use to > implement synchronization. > > Both of us and I am sure all of you'll would concur that we must use > standards compliant technologies to implement the sync. So we have > decided to use a SyncML (an OMA standard sync Protocol) compliant server > and client infrastructure. > > The Client component would be developed using the Funambol C++ SDK. > For the Client to work , we must use a SyncML compliant server. > We have two options here : > 1. Mooha SyncML server > Pros: > 1. Completely written in PHP > 2. Uses MySQL as a backend > Because of the above two points , it would integrate with ownCloud very > well. > Cons: > 1. Provides sync only for Contacts and Calendars. > 2. Relatively new project, in its early stages, only supports > calendars, notes, contacts as of now. > 3. A very small developer community , 3 developers. hence new > feature requests and bug reports get resolved very slowly. > 4. While synchronizing with akunambol ( a SyncML client) the server > behaves erratically. (Gives errors, even when the data has got > synchronized to the database successfully). > > 2. Funambol SyncML server: > Pros: > 1. Very Mature, version 10 (currently). > 2. Very large developer community and a large contributor community. > 3. Supports a lot of Synchronization types like Contacts, Calendar, > Files, E-mail etc. > 4. Has a very mature Client SDK (in C++ and Java). > > I would like to point out that Funambol has a lot of mobile clients > (android , iphone, blackberry) which make the solution very widely > adoptable and convenient. These are just sync clients and do not clash > with Bartek's work. > > (These clients would work with any syncML compliant server , including > Mooha. But they are much more tested with Funambol). > > Cons: > 1. The Server is written in Java. So the integration with the > existing infrastructure would be slightly more time consuming as > compared to Mooha. > 2. Tomcat takes up around 40 to 50MB of RAM . Though most VPS > providers provide much more than this but this leaves slightly lesser > RAM for other apps of owncloud. > > I personally would want to use Funambol for the server but before > starting anything I would like to take the consent of the community > members. > > Please do share your comments / suggestions.
While funambol is certainly a better server, I would hate to see a dependency on java for the hosting. In the current state mooha doesn't provide what we need but it's at least a base to work with. - Robin Appelman
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Owncloud mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/owncloud
