On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 13:19, Ettore Perazzoli wrote:
On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 14:54, JP Rosevear wrote:
hmm, but then, what about changes in the source? How would the backend
know?
It doesn't know right now either. I think we can work this out along
the way if necessary.
I think if
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 13:30, JP Rosevear wrote:
I prefer the serialized source solution, because it is possible to open
ad hoc calendars for temporary purposes. Could the gconf key just be a
named property on the source?
I guess it could, but then you have a consistency problem... I.e. you
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 13:49, Ettore Perazzoli wrote:
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 13:30, JP Rosevear wrote:
I prefer the serialized source solution, because it is possible to open
ad hoc calendars for temporary purposes. Could the gconf key just be a
named property on the source?
I guess it
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 11:02, Ettore Perazzoli wrote:
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 14:00, JP Rosevear wrote:
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 13:49, Ettore Perazzoli wrote:
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 13:30, JP Rosevear wrote:
I prefer the serialized source solution, because it is possible to open
ad hoc
On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 07:34, JP Rosevear wrote:
On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 21:06, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
Ettore, Toshok and I just had a discussion on IRC re. what to do with
ESource and how to get parameters across to backends.
What we more-or-less agreed on is that we can pass the
On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 12:36, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 07:34, JP Rosevear wrote:
On Thu, 2003-11-13 at 21:06, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
Ettore, Toshok and I just had a discussion on IRC re. what to do with
ESource and how to get parameters across to backends.
What
