On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 12:05 +0200, Christian Hilberg wrote: > This is why I propose a dedicated offline state, which is not dependent on > network availability, and which is visible to the user by being displayed > in each client that connects to E-D-S. Such a state makes it very clear to > both, user and backends, how to act and what to expect during the workflow > (for instance, there cannot be any sync conflicts while working in offline > mode - the user just plainly does not expect to see any in this case). > It also seems that online or offline is not a state the E-D-S clients need > to maintain, but it is rather a status E-D-S itself maintains (and tells it > to its backends as well as to any client that connects and has the capability > to display E-D-S's current status). Once a client requests E-D-S to change > online/offline operational mode, the change request can be propagated to > both, all backends which do implement a notion of online/offline operational > mode, as well as to any client connected to E-D-S which has the capability > of showing E-D-S state.
Need to think on that some more, but can we at least agree that capability would be _in addition_ to the properties I proposed for EBackend, so I can start implementing a few of them? Trying to get consensus on some initial steps here and not debate this to perfection before anything gets done. Matt _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers mailing list [email protected] To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
