On 4 Feb 2009, at 18:48, Quentin Mathé wrote: > Hi Eric, > > Le 3 févr. 09 à 23:16, Eric Wasylishen a écrit : > >> Hi, >> There are several frameworks which haven't been modified in quite a >> while, and seem to be superseded by newer frameworks. I'm wondering >> if >> I can move these to the Deprecated directory: >> >> Frameworks/AddressesKit/ >> - David was saying that the AddressKit API is poorly designed, and >> we'll need a new one which uses CoreObject (if we need a framework at >> all?). > > We could use CoreObject API directly, but having a standalone > framework as syntactic sugar is more friendly. > AddressBook API also allows us to remain compatible with Mac OS X, so > I don't know whether it's really a good idea to design our own API. > It should stay there until it's rewritten since we have nothing else > to replace AddressManager that relies on it.
I would like us to have a 'native' interface, which is just a set of CO conventions and a standard CO location for people. We can then write an AB compatibility API on top of this, but always view it as a foreign API, rather than our native address book API. I believe compatibility with this API is going to become less important in future. It's ugly beyond belief, and Sync Services replicate all of its functionality in a much less brain-dead way on OS X now. David _______________________________________________ Etoile-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-dev
