http://bugzilla.moblin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3604
--- Comment #15 from pohly <[email protected]> 2009-09-04 00:37:09 --- (In reply to comment #14) > > I haven't really thought much about this. If it can be done without breaking > > the abstraction layers, then it would be a cleaner way to access specific > > config properties, like "sync URL". On the other hand, the caller of > > askPassword/savePassword might not know what the currently active > > EvolutionSyncConfig and SyncSourceConfig is. > Yes, it's the main concern of this issue. Currently I past the ConfigNode to > these 2 functions because the caller(PasswordConfigProperty) has this kind of > information for the configNode is pasted to it by its own caller. > I think the most confusing thing to me is I don't know what kind of > information > will be needed except config.ini in the future. It's hard to figure it out. That's really your choice at this time ;-) Make a list of all passwords that currently exist and define what the keys for storing them in the GNOME keyring are. Then check whether askPassword() and savePassword() have enough information to implement the access, and implement it. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.moblin.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug. _______________________________________________ Syncevolution-issues mailing list [email protected] http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution-issues
