Re: [Evolution-hackers] Subclassable and extendable IMAPX



Hi,

Am Donnerstag 10 Mai 2012, um 12:26:51 schrieb Chenthill:
> On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 11:52 +0200, Christian Hilberg wrote:
> > Hi everyone!
> > 
> > It has been a while [0] since the idea of making IMAPX
> > subclassable / extendable for backends to use. Time to
> > bring the topic back into the public again. :-)
> >
> > There is a bugzilla entry [1] now for the topic, and Chen
> > bravely started out with preparations to make IMAPX extendable.
> [...] 
> I hope you had sent the mail just before our irc discussion. To
> summarize, 

True. :)

> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=674310#c9 has the fixes. We
> now have a hook in imapx_untagged which would allow the subclasses to
> handle the responses that are not handled in IMAP (imapx provider). I
> did not find a case where a sub-classed imap provider would be
> interested in tags which are already processed by the parent imap
> provider,

Regarding behavioural consistency, I believe it could even be evil to
allow for a subclass to override parent's already-defined behaviour.
Not allowing that IMHO is a good thing.

> so i have provided a simple hook to handle, unhandled tags. I
> hope this would be sufficient to support all the above needs.
> 
> Please let me know if you need anything more..
> 
> Thanks, Chenthill.

I should start playing with that right after the 3.4.2 release.
Once I get my hands on the code, I will be able to tell. :-)
@Chen: Thanks a lot for your efforts, much appreciated.

Kind regards,

	Christian


-- 
kernel concepts GmbH       Tel: +49-271-771091-14
Sieghuetter Hauptweg 48
D-57072 Siegen
http://www.kernelconcepts.de/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.



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