On Di, 2011-01-18 at 22:53 +0000, Frederik Elwert wrote: > I must confess that I don’t really understand what the type issue is > about, but renaming the GetConfig methods looks not exactly pretty. If > you split type into new properties, maybe you could use new names for > all new properties and drop the name "type" altogether. That probably > would make incompatible clients fail, but would leave the method names > intact. Don’t know if that makes sense, was just a thought.
I agree that renaming the methods doesn't gain much and given the current use of the API in Genesis and sync-ui only causes problems. What I want to avoid is that some (unknown) client thinks it is doing the right thing by setting, for example, "evolutionsource" when syncevo-dbus-server in fact ignores it after the renaming to "database". I think I can achieve that by adding an additional check to SetConfig(): if it contains obsolete or unknown properties, reject the whole operation. That's a worthwhile check anyway, and as far as I know currently missing. The API change itself can be announced via a new entry in GetCapabilities(). -- 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
