On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 21:47 +0530, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote: > On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 15:54 +0100, Michael Meeks wrote: > > Hi Harish, > > > > First - thanks for digging these changes out for me. But - no, I'm not > > just interested in ebook (though for OO.o that is all), but I'm > > -primarily- interested Evo. itself, in being able to use and test the > > most recent version to help avoid regressions, and indeed ship it for > > older platforms. > > > > So - if you could do the same for the other e-d-s libraries, it'd be > > great to see what changed there too. > > > > On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 20:03 +0530, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote: > > > The changes in question are as follows : > > > http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/evolution-data-server/addressbook/libebook/e-contact.h?r1=1.20&r2=1.21 > > > > So - this changed the EContactPhoto structure - why ? surely that is > > rather pointless. You could easily have added an EContactMimePhoto type > > and added a synthetic back-compat field that would handle the old case > > [ if it was of (whatever) mime type you expected ]. So - I see no > > problem at all doing this compatibly whatsoever. Perhaps a few more > > (~20) lines of code tops. > > > I had not reviewed the patch or explored the alternatives to avoid > breakage. I would let the addressbook hackers to comment on that. > I do think you have a point above, though. > > [1] OTH, I did approve the change into the release on the clear basis > that ferrying Photo images on Contacts was prohibitively hampering the > performance of the dbus port and the library had all to gain by ferrying > a url instead. > > > > http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/evolution-data-server/addressbook/libebook/e-contact.h?r1=1.21&r2=1.22 > > > > You converted a gpointer value to a 'const gpointer value' - I don't > > see that that is particularly necessary, or likely to break the ABI of > > anything unless it reflects some underlying lifecycle issue. Also the > > enum insertions were (this time) added at the end of the enumeration, so > > why should that break anything ? surely that's a compatible extension. > > Point taken - The original patch would have introduced a break - this > was reworked as an append before it was committed. > > > > > > > The #313533 patch was vital for Ross Burton's dbus-based EDS and running > > > EDS on devices (say Nokia 770) would not be possible w/o this change. > > > > Nonsense - at least the link above has no API change that is necessary > > for dbus or Nokia 770 support - unless I'm missing something huge; good > > buzz-words though :-) > > > > See http://www.go-evolution.org/DBus_Port_of_EDS .
The charts on the link seems to be broken ATM..I will post the performance charts to the thread. BTW, An interesting link I came across... http://applications.linux.com/article.pl?sid=06/08/04/2158214&from=rss --Harish _______________________________________________ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers