On Di, 2011-05-17 at 16:25 +0200, Milan Crha wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 15:59 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> I'm not sure if I got it right, but such workarounds are just wrong from
> my point of view. You cannot force servers to use certain types of IDs
> because of constraints given by application which tries to connect to
> it.

We can't force a server. But we can adapt the file backend.

> Your interface between QtContacts and eds may hide this QtContacts
> implementation detail, to be able to support any book backend, current
> or future. This might not be done in eds backend itself, from my point
> of view.

"might not" or "must not"? 

Anyway, the direction is clear: add the mapping code to QtContacts-EDS,
as soon as time allows. We are juggling resources between various tasks
at the moment, so I'd say as long as we have a solution that works for
the time being, I'd rather see other problems addressed first.

While we do that, the 32 bit patch should remain outside upstream EDS.
Once we have the mapping code, we can revisit that question by doing a
direct comparison with and without it.

-- 
Bye, Patrick Ohly
--  
patrick.o...@gmx.de
http://www.estamos.de/


_______________________________________________
evolution-hackers mailing list
evolution-hackers@gnome.org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

Reply via email to