On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 11:32 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: > On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 14:51 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > I have some partial implementation of the API ready and will push it > > shortly to the new SyncEvolution git repo on freedesktop.org > > The code is now in the for-master/pim branch, see the > src/dbus/server/manager directory. The API text is in > src/dbus/server/pim/pim-manager-api.txt. I decided to avoid using IVI in > the code because it might turn out to be useful elsewhere.
A status update is due. The current code is in the "pim" branch. I dropped the "for-master" part from the branch name temporarily because it indicates that the code needs to be include in nightly testing, which I wanted to disable temporarily. Going forward I will continue pushing to "pim", with the same caveat that sometimes I might force push a rebased branch. The latest code implements reading all properties of a contact which seemed to make sense. The API description was not updated. I'm a bit torn here: how much should the API describe a specific contact data model? Different implementations will support different properties. Choosing active address books with the SetActiveAddressBook() is also implemented. It depends on an implementation of set_persona_stores (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=682941) which is not yet in folks master. If you want to compile with a folks that doesn't have that yet, then stay with the SyncEvolution source before the "PIM Manager: implemented SetActiveAddressBooks()" commit. I started testing merging of contacts from different address books, but didn't get the expected result from folks (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=682941#c58). Needs further investigation/discussion. > The "pbap" branch was updated as well. It passed nightly testing after > fixing a minor autotools linking issue, and with SyncEvolution 1.3 > tagged and branched off master, the "pbap" branch can be merged into > master. It's now merged. -- 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
