On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Libor Zoubek <lzou...@jezzovo.net> wrote: > thanks for your reply, > > comments inline > On Tue, 05 Jul 2011 08:40:53 +0200, Carsten Haitzler > <ras...@rasterman.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:01:06 +0200 "Libor Zoubek" <lzou...@jezzovo.net> >> said: >> >>> Hi, devs >>> >>> I've reported a bug http://trac.enlightenment.org/e/ticket/775 >>> Please review/apply attached patch that fixes above bug. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> cheers, >>> >>> Libor Zoubek >>> >>> P.S. I am a happy e-user and this is my 1st attempt to contribute >> >> cool!... patch kind of good. it moves forward to a new version (1.2) >> BUT... >> your patch makes edbus daemon still say it does 0.9 but the spec you are >> making >> it move to is 1.2 (more strings). so E_NOTIFICATION_DAEMON_VERSION and >> E_NOTIFICATION_DAEMON_SUPPORTS_SPEC_VERSION should say "1.2"... > you are right, I wasn' sure. But as far as I am reading throught > differences between 0.9 and 1.2, it seems like only getServerInformation > signature changed. There are also defined new capabilities, that server > can support. >> also e_notify_unmarshal_get_server_information_return doesnt seem to be >> backwards compatible - ie it doesnt handle "sss" vs "ssss" signature >> (extra >> version string on the end). we'd be pretty bad breaking compat to 0.9. >> so we >> should do "if "sss" > handle 0.9, else if "ssss" > handle 1.2" like >> logic there. >> >> :) >> > I am not sure how to do this and it if is even possible. Scenario is: > client calls getServerInformation via dbus, server responses something > ("sss" or "ssss"), but client has not capability to say "I am able to talk > to server, which supports spec version X". thatswhy I don't know how > should server recognize if returns "sss" or "ssss"
The app is wrong when it requires a fourth string to be returned. if no fourth string is returned it should assume that the server support only spec version <= 0.9. it can only be the task of the app to handle the return of this method in a save way. nothing the server could do. Regards, Hannes > I've been digging into gnome-notification daemon implementation and did > not found anything that makes it compatible with < 0.9 spec, > > see > http://git.gnome.org/browse/notification-daemon/tree/src/daemon/daemon.c?h=0.5 > line 1731 > or http://git.gnome.org/browse/notification-daemon/tree/src/daemon.c line > 288 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. > Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security > threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes > sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
