> On Oct. 23, 2012, 4:22 p.m., David Edmundson wrote: > > From a code POV, it's good (except for the _massive_ bug that you copied > > and pasted.) > > > > From a usability request, why would you deny if you didn't want to block as > > well? It seems having 3 options is a bit redundant IRL, and I would propose > > merging with deny. > > Rohan Garg wrote: > I'd say that 'Deny' would mean "I'm not sure about this person, how about > I ask if this really is him before accepting" while 'Block' would mean > "Spammer/Stalker!!! Don't ever prompt me again!" > > David Edmundson wrote: > And how would you ask about this person? > > They're not in your roster (so you can't ask them). In _some_ protocols > they can't send you messages, in some they can. > In the protocols where they can send you messages when you clicked deny, > they could send you messages without asking for your presence anyway so > they're not going to be requesting presence subscription. >
Real life? EMail? IRC? > On Oct. 23, 2012, 4:22 p.m., David Edmundson wrote: > > contact-request-handler.cpp, line 347 > > <http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107012/diff/1/?file=92119#file92119line347> > > > > NO! > > The code has the potential to infinite loop!!!!!! > > > > the ++i should be outside the if. > > > > I've just noticed you copied and pasted this. So well done for helping > > me fix a bug! > > I've been wondering where that existing 100% CPU usage bug came from. > > Rohan Garg wrote: > Whoops. Good catch. Fixing all over :) > > David Edmundson wrote: > the fix on the existing code needs to go onto the stable branch, whereas > this patch should not as it has a new string. > > So be careful. Ofcourse :) Do you know of a bug number against this issue? - Rohan ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107012/#review20747 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Oct. 23, 2012, 4:30 p.m., Rohan Garg wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107012/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Oct. 23, 2012, 4:30 p.m.) > > > Review request for Telepathy. > > > Description > ------- > > Add an option to block an incoming contact. This can be used to prevent a > notification to be shown when being spammed with new contact requests. > > > This addresses bugs 297994 and 308809. > http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=297994 > http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=308809 > > > Diffs > ----- > > contact-request-handler.h 43456ee > contact-request-handler.cpp ea24885 > > Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107012/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Works fine. Once blocked, notification does not reappear. User can also > accept a blocked request after unblocking the contact and resending contact > authorization. > > > Thanks, > > Rohan Garg > >
_______________________________________________ KDE-Telepathy mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-telepathy
