On Mi, 2011-05-18 at 07:34 +0200, Milan Crha wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 17:19 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > 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
> > >
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 15:59 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Di, 2011-05-17 at 18:49 +0530, Chenthill wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 14:51 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > | Further work if you agree in principle:
> > > | * let clients query whether all contacts have the simplified ID -
> >
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 17:19 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> 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
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 applicat
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 15:59 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > I haven checked if other backend's would need this virtual function
> > though. Maybe webdav might use it ?
>
> And then what? Build and maintain out-of-tree MeeGo versions of all
> backends? Quite frankly, patching the existing backends s
On Di, 2011-05-17 at 18:49 +0530, Chenthill wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 14:51 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > | Further work if you agree in principle:
> > | * let clients query whether all contacts have the simplified ID -
> > |could be done with the dynamic capabilities that I men
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 14:51 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Di, 2011-05-17 at 13:27 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 14:04 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > On Di, 2011-05-17 at 12:38 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > > Even if we *didn't* have immediate plans to use other b
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 14:51 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Di, 2011-05-17 at 13:27 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 14:04 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > On Di, 2011-05-17 at 12:38 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > > Even if we *didn't* have immediate plans to use other b
On Di, 2011-05-17 at 13:27 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 14:04 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > On Di, 2011-05-17 at 12:38 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > Even if we *didn't* have immediate plans to use other back ends like EWS
> > > with this setup, that would be entirely
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 14:04 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Di, 2011-05-17 at 12:38 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > Even if we *didn't* have immediate plans to use other back ends like EWS
> > with this setup, that would be entirely the wrong thing to do, surely?
>
> I'm not so sure. We are pitc
On Di, 2011-05-17 at 12:38 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 15:16 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > As part of wrapping QtContacts around EDS [1] I ran into the same issue
> > that Nokia already encountered in their Maemo 5 [2] backend: EDS uses
> > strings as ID, QtContacts 32 bi
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 15:16 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> As part of wrapping QtContacts around EDS [1] I ran into the same issue
> that Nokia already encountered in their Maemo 5 [2] backend: EDS uses
> strings as ID, QtContacts 32 bit integers.
>
> Nokia solved that by setting up an in-memory has
On Do, 2011-04-28 at 15:16 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> Attached the resulting patch. Note that with the patch applied, all new
> contacts in a Berkley DB get the simpler IDs, unconditionally. Older
> contacts continue to use their existing IDs. Would something like this
> be acceptable upstream?
13 matches
Mail list logo
