implementing ‘basic’ scheduling (rfc6638?)

[f1-outsourcing]

Hi Daniel @danielgrigore ,

Afaik cosmo does not support processing attendees server side. I have seen your replies about imip and itip, but I think a some basic functionality where attendees are confirmed on the same domain (user1@example.com and user2@example.com) on the same server, could be nice to have out of the box.

What I think is a bit strange, is that after so many years such functionality is still not available. This in combination with pull requests not being merged, worries me a bit about asking someone to implement this. I don’t really see much future in a project that has countless separately maintained forks. Maybe you could take some time to answer these questions I have, before I commit to do something?

This open-source project is totally independent and not susceptible to any conflicts of interest that might arise from being used by 1und1?

I assume that when someone needs to implement this rfc6638 (or parts of it) these changes will have to be applied to “cosmo/cosmo-core/src/main/java/org/unitedinternet/cosmo/dav/”.
I assume this cosmo/cosmo-core/ is the discontinued chandler code.

Are you accepting updates to this?

I have the impression you are quite knowledgable about caldav, could you estimate how much time it would take to implement such feature? It would help me decide if it would be worth pursuing this any further.

It is not so efficient needing someone to do a lot of research to get familiar with this project and standards. Would you be able to know someone that could do such things? Preferably from the Roman/eastern Europe region so this work is still cost-effective.

At a later time it would be nice to have external notifications, do you have any development code available that we could make production ready?

[f1-outsourcing]

Hi @danielgrigore Daniel,

Can you check this, I would like to invest some time and money in this and I don't want it to go to waste not having this added.

[danielgrigore]

Hi @f1-outsourcing

Please have a look at the README.md file.

This project contains only CalDAV core part from Chandler with its dependencies up to date (initial project being closed in 2008)

As stated there cosmo contains only core CalDAV and the plan is to keep that way.
RFC6638 is a CalDAV extension for which there are no plans.

Even if an extension is built that does not mean it needs to stay in cosmo repo.
On the contrary it can be a totally separate project that only uses the cosmo-api and cosmo-core jars like the cosmo-webapp demo application.

Cheers,

[f1-outsourcing]

Even if an extension is built that does not mean it needs to stay in cosmo repo.
On the contrary it can be a totally separate project that only uses the cosmo-api and cosmo-core jars like the cosmo-webapp demo application.

So why don't I see such functionality added in this repo than at eg. cosmo-core-ext? This guy @pashazz was even willing to implement this in 2019 (#33)