On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 18:15 +0100, Will Thompson wrote: > On 01/06/11 09:15, Xavier Claessens wrote: > > Le mercredi 01 juin 2011 à 09:46 +0200, Guillaume Desmottes a écrit : > >> Le mardi 31 mai 2011 à 15:22 -0400, Robert McQueen a écrit : > >>>>> Concretely, telepathy-glib would be split into three shared libraries: > >>> .... > >>>> Where would live common types such as, say, TpHandle? Both > >>>> telepathy-glib-dbus-N and tp-glib will use it and tp-glib will have to > >>>> expose it in its public API. > > I think making handles disappear entirely is probably the best fix. I > appreciate that they appear in the high-level API for telepathy-glib in > a bunch of places: I haven't looked over how much pain it would be to > hide them everywhere. But generally I would like them to suffer a timely > demise.
If you're set on removing handles, try to make sure there's still a consistent way to represent contacts which haven't yet been created or have since been destroyed. Folks doesn't have a good way to represent pending Personas (read: contacts) which can make things awkward in the client. We'll probably fix this in the medium-term by having our add_persona_*() functions return a Persona immediately and fill in the details (or notify destruction in case of failure) later. It's not ideal, but switching to an intermediate ID (like TpHandle) for 2.x seemed like a cleaner fix. What issues would moving away from TpHandle fix? Regards, -Travis _______________________________________________ telepathy mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/telepathy
