On Mi, 2011-01-12 at 07:34 +0000, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Di, 2011-01-11 at 22:05 +0000, Frederik Elwert wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, den 11.01.2011, 15:50 +0100 schrieb Patrick Ohly: 
> > > There's one catch here: the migration is supposed to be invisible to
> > > such users. But as the code stands at the moment, the foobar.old config
> > > will be visible to them.
> > > 
> > > Two solutions:
> > >      1. do not keep the backup config around
> > >      2. filter out *.old in the list of configs reported via D-Bus
> > >         (which is what GUIs use); command line users will still see them
> > >      3. name the automatically generated backups like something which is
> > >         more obviously not created by a user, like .foobar.old, and hide
> > >         that
> > 
[...]
> > Another idea: Create a dedicated directory for backups, e.g.
> > ~/.config/syncevolution/.backups/, and move old configs there. Just a
> > thought, don’t know if that has any advantages over the other options
> > you mention.
> 
> It has the disadvantage that the backup config is no longer accessible
> at all inside SyncEvolution, not even to power users of the command
> line.
> 
> I still prefer option 2, but I'm only one user of SyncEvolution. I'm
> vastly outnumbered.

I implemented a different solution, one which IMHO is more elegant than
hiding *.old configs in the D-Bus call: in the renamed config, the
ConsumerReady flag is reset to 0. That way the decision whether the
migrated config is shown to users is left to the UI, instead of
hard-coding it in the syncevo-dbus-server.

The expectation is that a GUI for average users will hide both templates
and existing configs unless they explicitly have ConsumerReady = 1.

However, this is not exactly how the GTK sync-UI works at the moment.
Jussi, do you remember why existing configs are exempt from the
"ConsumerReady" check?

We might have done it so that users can configure a non-supported server
and then have it show up in the sync-ui, but then they might as well set
ConsumerReady = 1 in the configuration. It would be consistent with
templates.

I suspect other GUIs also ignore it. I can update the GTK sync-ui.
Frederik, would a similar change make sense and be possible in Genesis?

-- 
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