private groupware objects

Bernhard Reiter bernhard at
Tue Aug 15 13:49:31 CEST 2006

Hi Joon,
Hi Martin,

Am Donnerstag, 10. August 2006 12:57 schrieb Joon Radley:
> > > We now have opened several topics:
> > >
> > > 1. privacy flag
> This issue has been discussed in depth. So far the only suggestion of any
> value is the encryption option and this is not saying a lot.

can you explain in more detail why the suggestions of
are not feasable?
Those are the best I have seen so far.

You have said to me that using namespaces would be a clutch,
but I still believe that all issues can be addressed.
As all solutions it is not extra clean, but it considers existing clients
to a maximum.

we also have recieved no answer from Konsec about the proposal.
Johannes wrote before that he could think of that, but did not follow up
on the post I have linked above. Maybe you can also ask them?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the format mailing list