On Thu, 2012-09-20 at 11:17 +0600, Ildar Mulyukov wrote: > As promised, my 1st proposal (in two parts). > > 1. As Patrick confirms, "Contexts are profiles independent of each > other".
But I didn't use the word profile, did I? > a. the "Context" word is quite inconvenient and ... > "context-specific", it isn't clear enough for understanding. Maybe it's > worth to use the "profile" word for that, leaving "context" as a legacy > term meaning a _profile_. For me, "profile" sounds more like a flat, predefined or editable set of options. A quick Google search for "configuration profile" brings up for example "Configuration Profiles" in Wireshark: http://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsug_html_chunked/ChCustConfigProfilesSection.html Or "profile configuration files", .pcf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profile_configuration_file These "profiles" match with SyncEvolution's "templates", not the "contexts". > b. For syncevolution cmdline tool: Move it from the @<context> part > to a --profile <profile name>. Again, for clear understanding. I agree that changing the command line would be worthwhile. Giving configuration and sources via positional arguments made it very hard to check for syntax errors or typos. It's a big change, though, which renders all existing HOWTOs invalid. Whether it is worth having a separate --profile (or --context) switch is open for debate. Would you also change all output which currently uses the @<context> notation? > What do ya think? I'd like to hear from more users what they think about this. What I see primarily are the negative effects (incompatible command line changes, the work for implementing all this, risk of new bugs), so I'd like to get some kind of confirmation that it would be worthwhile. -- 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
