Re: [Evolution-hackers] ESource shortcomings

On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 14:16, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > (Although, maybe something like ELDAPSource vs. EWebCalSource would make
> > for a nicer, easier to understand API?)
> I think subclassing would be nicer, since it would specify which
> properties are used, and provide easy type checking.

Nod.  So, who writes these subclasses?  :-)

> So basically, I don't think we need the "move" folder op at all, and the
> "copy" folder op only for local sources. Is that correct?

We need "copy", "rename" and "delete".  These ops are not just for local
stores, in some stores you'd want that to still work even if the folders
are not local (e.g. think Connector).

> > > Oh, another thing :) Will the user be able to create arbitrary top-level
> > > ESourceGroups, and if so, how will the UI for that look, roughly?
> > 
> > Not unless she fiddles with GConf by hand.  The groups are pretty much
> > supposed to be defined by the app, which should use them to group
> > objects sensibly.
> Will we support that sort of GConf fiddling?

Not really.  I mean, it can be done in principle, but we shouldn't
suggest or encourage it.

-- Ettore

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]