The original problem has been addressed by the b3 fix. Confirmed: TB contacts are no longer deleted locally when deleted on Google Contacts AND Write only mode is selected for the account. Confirmed: contact deleted in Google Contacts can only be restored by running the script you provided for Kathleen.
Josh, thanks very much for the script, it worked beautifully.
Thank you both for the update, I appreciate it.
The movement of changes seem to be based upon preference for 'last change', whether or not it was intended. Perhaps the solution to many problems and a simplification for the (my original question and Kathleen's followup) could be something like a 'force update action' address this? Sort of a 'hey, restore this contact/AB from here regardless of who is older'.
That script essentially fools TB into thinking that all its contacts are newer. Read-only mode is similar in that it sets the last modified date of TB contacts to a time well before TB or Google existed. Write-only mode does the same for Google contacts (except, as you noticed contacts that were deleted remotely were also deleted locally because that's a slightly different path). This was the most simple way of doing things that I can think of, from my end at least.
While useful and functional, the administration of the accounts (i.e. a separate dialog box popping up for each Address book - to - Google Account relationship) may get cumbersome with a large number of Google Contacts groups. Perhaps a table or matrix where all account attributes are edited together would be useful)
I'm not sure I know what you are talking about when you mention a separate dialog for each AB. You should see something similar to
this (it is outdated) after you click on gContactSync -> Accounts. The initial popup when you first install gContactSync is only shown once to help you get started. I haven't done much with that first login dialog so I'd appreciate any tips you may have.
Since you already said this is essentially what it does, maybe you could consider changing the term 'reset' to 'Replace From Server' since most people would understand what it meant without having to ask and/or read any docs...
Yes I will definitely consider it. I've mostly done work in C and C++ other than this and some Thunderbird stuff, so I always appreciate suggestions on making things more user-friendly. I added a quick comment onto the bug I linked to.
Thank you all for the comments, I'd like to test 0.2 to 0.3 upgrades (invisible if everything goes well) a bit more then I think 0.3 is ready for a release candidate or initial release. I appreciate the suggestions and bug reports! Please let me know what else you think or find.
Josh
