On Di, 2010-09-28 at 19:58 +0100, Frederik Elwert wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 17.09.2010, 10:02 +0200 schrieb Patrick Ohly: 
> > On Do, 2010-09-16 at 21:10 +0100, Frederik Elwert wrote:
> > > From Genesis’ side, I could catch the exceptions and ignore them (i.e.,
> > > act as I did before the new methods were introduced). Should work, but
> > > maybe is not really pretty. Another idea would be to allow other clients
> > > to Attach() to sessions to prevent them from terminating before they are
> > > dealt with.
> > 
> > That *is* already allowed :-) Whether it works is a different question,
> > but it should.
> 
> Oh, I missed that. Regarding to [1], there is a Detach() method, but not
> Attach().

There should have been one. I wonder why we didn't implement it, it
definitely was part of the original vision. Never mind, there is such an
Attach() now in 1.0.99.7:
http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=7761

> > I could also introduce a delayed clean up of completed sessions. For
> > example, keep them around 1 minute after the last client has detached,
> > just in case that someone is still interested in the session's
> > attributes.
> 
> In my eyes, this sounds like a very simple and good solution. It gives
> clients enough time to request session information (or attach to the
> session if they need it to exist longer than the built-in interval).

Implemented, see 1.0.99.7 and http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=7766

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.


_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution

Reply via email to