On Jun 14, 2007, at 8:32 PM, Gustavo Pichorim Boiko wrote: > On Thursday 14 June 2007 22:02:17 Matt Rogers wrote: >> On Jun 14, 2007, at 9:21 AM, Gustavo Pichorim Boiko wrote: >>> On Wednesday 13 June 2007 12:30:34 Olivier Goffart wrote: >>>> Le mercredi 13 juin 2007, Gustavo Pichorim Boiko a écrit : >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> After thinking a bit more about that subject, I've got to write a >>>>> proposal on that subject. >>>>> >>>>> http://people.mandriva.com/~boiko/kopete/user_info/ >>>> >>>> From your page: >>>>> One approach to simplify that would be to share a single identity >>>>> across >>>>> all protocols, but this does not fit in all cases (for example, >>>>> in a >>>>> jabber account used for work contacts, you might want to put a >>>>> different >>>>> photo than the one you would put in a personal account), and >>>>> for the >>>>> uncovered cases we still lack a solution. >>>> >>>> That's the point of having multiple identities. >>>> >>>> My idea of a identity is the same as a meta-contact. (or like a >>>> meta-account) An Identity contains accounts like a meta-contact >>>> contains >>>> contact. >>> >>> Ok, so I'm creating a branch work/kopete/identity_refactory to >>> start working >>> on this. The plan is: >>> >>> - Each account will belong to exactly one Identity. >>> >>> - Each identity can have one or more accounts associated to it. >>> >>> - Accounts can be moved from one identity to another >>> >>> - Properties (such as nickname/photo/personal info and so on) will >>> be stored >>> in the identity rather than the account. >>> >>> - Accounts should get/set properties from the identity rather than >>> having >>> their own properties. >>> >>> - Synchronization will be handle in the following way: >>> * If you set a property in the identity, it will be applied to >>> all accounts >>> belonging to this identity >>> * If a property changes server-side for one of the accounts in >>> the identity, >>> the user will be asked if he wants to have that property sync from >>> server to >>> the identity (and therefore to all other accounts), and, of course, >>> provide >>> the "Do not ask again" option. If there is only one account in the >>> identity, >>> do not ask and only apply the settings >>> >>> - The "Global Identity" will be a convenience for moving all >>> accounts to a >>> single identity (and maybe show an interface to unify the >>> properties that are >>> different in the old identities). The old identities will be >>> removed (this >>> can be discussed though). >>> >>> - The user info interface (the one I described in my proposal) will >>> get/set >>> properties from the identity, not from the contact >>> >>> - The property framework should (probably) be moved to the identity >> >> What do you mean by this? The property framework is needed at the >> protocol level as level for the so-called private properties. > > Forget about this topic, I was missing the fact that the properties > at the > contact level are needed for, huh, contacts ;) > >>> - The Akonady support will probably be implemented on top of the >>> identity >> >> huh? the akonadi support is about storing the contacts (at the very >> least) from the protocols in the akonadi database and implementing >> addressbook integration, etc. > > Ok, this topic was completelly wrong. > > After discussing a bit with Gof on IRC we got something interesting: > We will move the property stuff to a class (named PropertyContainer or > whatever better name someone suggests). > > This makes it possible to use it from Kopete::Identity (and from > other places > too) and it also make it possible to use the user info interface of my > proposal on top of that. >
Can you expand on this? I don't understand what all is meant by the above (PropertyContainer) >>> Any complaints? :) >>> >>> Cheers >> >> Yes. I want to be able to associate an account to more than one >> identity. > > And then we start to have problems on deciding (at the account > level) from > which identity properties should come from, increase the complexity on > solving synchronization problems, etc. Is it really worth adding such > complexity? > > Besides that, having accounts in more than one identity at the same > time would > imply on creating more complex interfaces for setting this up > (which is > something we could avoid). > > What do you think? > > Cheers I think the original way is fine now. :) Matt _______________________________________________ kopete-devel mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kopete-devel
