Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evolution-data-server offline handling

2012-02-06 Thread Alexander Larsson
On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 16:58 -0500, Matthew Barnes wrote: On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 21:27 +, Philip Withnall wrote: This sounds good. Do I have to make any fixes to the Google Contacts address book backend, or will it all be handled centrally? (i.e. With this GNetworkMonitor change, will

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evolution-data-server offline handling

2012-02-03 Thread Matthew Barnes
On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 11:38 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote: IMHO we should implement actual network availibility tracking in EDataFactory (using NM or ConnMan) to get the real state inside the backends (i.e. if there is no network the backends should always be offline). Alex and I talked

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evolution-data-server offline handling

2012-02-03 Thread Philip Withnall
On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 11:13 -0500, Matthew Barnes wrote: On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 11:38 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote: IMHO we should implement actual network availibility tracking in EDataFactory (using NM or ConnMan) to get the real state inside the backends (i.e. if there is no network

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evolution-data-server offline handling

2012-02-03 Thread Matthew Barnes
On Fri, 2012-02-03 at 21:27 +, Philip Withnall wrote: This sounds good. Do I have to make any fixes to the Google Contacts address book backend, or will it all be handled centrally? (i.e. With this GNetworkMonitor change, will there be any bugs left in the Google backend’s handling of