Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removal of implementation details from public API, any breakages?
On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 12:38 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 11:33 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > >From the current discussion, it looks like we are safe. Can we do > > something like this for this release before we dung them out? > > > > #ifdef E_D_S_DEPRECATED > > #include > > #endif > > The patches consist of removing functions or headers from the install, > these cannot be deprecated because they are still used by EDS itself. Hmm. Fine. Just go ahead then :) -Srini. > > I don't think there needs to be any notice: the headers and functions > are implementation details of libebook and libecal, and are not possible > to use outside of the implementation of libebook/libecal. > > Ross ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removal of implementation details from public API, any breakages?
On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 11:33 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > #ifdef E_D_S_DEPRECATED > #include > #endif Just FYI, EDS_DISABLE_DEPRECATED is what Gtk-Doc looks for. Matthew Barnes ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removal of implementation details from public API, any breakages?
On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 11:33 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > >From the current discussion, it looks like we are safe. Can we do > something like this for this release before we dung them out? > > #ifdef E_D_S_DEPRECATED > #include > #endif The patches consist of removing functions or headers from the install, these cannot be deprecated because they are still used by EDS itself. I don't think there needs to be any notice: the headers and functions are implementation details of libebook and libecal, and are not possible to use outside of the implementation of libebook/libecal. Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.burtonini.com./ PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removal of implementation details from public API, any breakages?
Ross, >From the current discussion, it looks like we are safe. Can we do something like this for this release before we dung them out? #ifdef E_D_S_DEPRECATED #include #endif -Srini. On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 10:32 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 12:15 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > It will be great if you can mail the details on the address book stuff > > as well. I would like the libebook clients like OOo, etc to comment on > > this. > > The addressbook changes are very similar: > > - e_book_view_new() is not public > - EBookListener and EBookViewListener are not public > > As before, these are not usable outside of libedata-book, so clients > should not be aware of their existence. > > I've had a quick look at the Zimbra Evolution code and it appears to not > use these either. > > Ross ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removal of implementation details from public API, any breakages?
On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 12:15 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > It will be great if you can mail the details on the address book stuff > as well. I would like the libebook clients like OOo, etc to comment on > this. The addressbook changes are very similar: - e_book_view_new() is not public - EBookListener and EBookViewListener are not public As before, these are not usable outside of libedata-book, so clients should not be aware of their existence. I've had a quick look at the Zimbra Evolution code and it appears to not use these either. Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.burtonini.com./ PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removal of implementation details from public API, any breakages?
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 11:29 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > Hi, > > Last week I committed a patch to libebook, and want to commit a patch to > libecal[1], which removes private functions and types from the installed > headers. This has several consequences: > > - e_cal_view_new() is removed > - ECalListener is removed > - ECalViewListener is removed > > I believe that nobody is using these functions apart from libecal > itself, so this removal is safe. However, I'd appreciate it if anyone > writing advanced clients to EDS (like Zimbra or Brutas) remove their > currently installed headers, apply the patch, and rebuild. Brutus is safe. Thanks for the notice, jules ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removal of implementation details from public API, any breakages?
Ross, It will be great if you can mail the details on the address book stuff as well. I would like the libebook clients like OOo, etc to comment on this. -Srini. On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 11:29 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > Hi, > > Last week I committed a patch to libebook, and want to commit a patch to > libecal[1], which removes private functions and types from the installed > headers. This has several consequences: > > - e_cal_view_new() is removed > - ECalListener is removed > - ECalViewListener is removed > > I believe that nobody is using these functions apart from libecal > itself, so this removal is safe. However, I'd appreciate it if anyone > writing advanced clients to EDS (like Zimbra or Brutas) remove their > currently installed headers, apply the patch, and rebuild. > > Thanks, > Ross > > [1] http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=438727 > ___ > Evolution-hackers mailing list > Evolution-hackers@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
[Evolution-hackers] Removal of implementation details from public API, any breakages?
Hi, Last week I committed a patch to libebook, and want to commit a patch to libecal[1], which removes private functions and types from the installed headers. This has several consequences: - e_cal_view_new() is removed - ECalListener is removed - ECalViewListener is removed I believe that nobody is using these functions apart from libecal itself, so this removal is safe. However, I'd appreciate it if anyone writing advanced clients to EDS (like Zimbra or Brutas) remove their currently installed headers, apply the patch, and rebuild. Thanks, Ross [1] http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=438727 -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.burtonini.com./ PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
