On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 12:25 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> Therefore I suggest to accept that sessions for config changes always
> lock the whole config tree, which allows that any config can be changed
> in such a session. This is an extension of the current D-Bus API and
> thus backwards compatible:
>       * Session.SetConfig() modifies the config named in StartSession,
>         as before
>       * a new Session.SetNamedConfig(<config name>) modifies any config;
>         it is only allowed in a session which was started with
>         Server.StartSessionWithFlags(<config name>, ['no-sync']), where
>         <config name> may be empty - such a session will prevent any
>         other session from running, while normal sessions may one day
>         run concurrently (not supported at the moment)
>       * there is no need for a Session.GetNamedConfig() because
>         Server.GetConfig() already provides that - should it be added
>         anyway, for the sake of completeness?

I have implemented this, including Session.GetNamedConfig(). The code is
currently in the dbus-named-configs branch:

http://meego.gitorious.org/meego-middleware/syncevolution/commit/e117672b52b1cb4fffeaac2f198f1692028a6ccb

Jussi, can you review this?

Srini, your feedback is also welcome, but Jussi probably understands
better how this fits into the current API.

-- 
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