Re: questions about the right system...

> Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> >> We still run a old OGo server here which only works with lightning 0.7
> >> and before.
> >> Yet as we run debian there is til yet no way to upgrade via "official"
> >> packages and self made packages are harder than we think about.
> > I don't know what "official" means but I have RPMs coming to the
> > OpenSUSE build service for SuSE, openSUSE, RHEL, and CentOS.  
> > <http://whitemiceconsulting.blogspot.com/search/label/opengroupware>
> > Only need to finish the Env & DB setup and I'll probably have to alter
> > the packages to no longer be in /usr/local as current packaging policies
> > forbid that.
> Yeah, but I got debian and need .deb packages.
> And I do not want to fiddle around with setting up other systems or a
> complete new install.
> It was easy, just grab the .deb from the buildd and install them, system
> updated and run (til some time around there were debian packages from
> nightly builds).
> Now I need to switch away from debian (no option) or setup a complete

Ok,  although I don't understand this attitude.  The point of a system
is to run applications [it is about the applications],  loyalty to a OS
or distribution of an OS doesn't make allot of sense to me.  The point
of the OS is to facilitate the system to run the application.  When an
application vendor recommends [or demands] SLES or CentOS/RHEL, etc...
we just install that. (Or dreadfully if they want AIX... eegads!) With
LINUX every distribution is 99.44% the same as every other; it is just
"apt" vs. "yum" vs. "zypper" all of which do the same thing.

> > I find updating or migrating OGo to be scandulously easy compared to
> > other services.  Install, point to the DB, and tar:untar/rsync/copy
> > "/var/lib/opengroupware".
> If you got the systems up and running, maybe. But if you got no suitable
> system running, it is a mess.

I'm not sure what this means.

> >> - -we want to functions of Outlook, e.g. free/busy information, basic
> >> calendar stuff, invitations, read/write rights to persons, individual
> >> calendars...
> > I don't think that even worked with ZideLook (at least ACL stuff didn't)
> > unless you used the folder tree to assign permissions [which IMO baffles
> > most users].  I don't know to what extent 'fancy features' are even
> > conceptually accessible via WebDAV/GroupDAV/CalDAV.
> Zidelook worked partly well enough.
> > Invitations are 100% a feature of the client AFAIK.   If there is a
> > server side requirement for that PLEASE open a bug report and point to a
> > reference document.
> >> - -a ressource management would be nice
> > I think this works currently, and has for awhile, so long as an e-mail
> > address is assigned to the resource.   I often assign them something
> > like resourceName@local.
> Over all: there is NO really suitable calenderapp which suites our
> needs, neiter OpenSource nor payware. Even outlook/exchange does not fit
> (linux clients and more than one server).
> It is really a mess :-(

I agree that there is not a solution I'm 100% happy with.  Although with
Evolution know working pretty well with OGo I'm happier than I was a few
months ago.

> Lets see if I setup a virt server only for OGo SVN (built from source
> without packages) and try the new zideone if its available. Another 2
> days go by...


-- 
OpenGroupware.org Users
[email protected]
http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/users