On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 12:54 -0500, Matthew Barnes wrote: > Sure. It makes sense for backends to continue advertising their own > capabilities -- static and non-static like "browsable". > > I'm just suggesting a way to peek at a backend's known capabilities > ahead of time without having to instantiate it.
Hi, I do not know, maybe I misunderstand your suggestion, but if there will be two different ways of getting backend capabilities, and each will return different set of them, then it'll be confusing. We are still talking about capabilities, thus whatever way the result should be consistent. And I do not see a point in "get capabilities without creating actual instance of a backend in the factory", creating backend instance and connecting to its destination (aka opening it) are two different tasks. >From what I understand then Tristan will always work with an instance, with an EClient descendant, asking "do you support xyz?" and if so, then he'll (pre)configure the xyz based on his needs. Right? Thus there will be nothing like "does generic backend support xyz?", if no, skip the whole backend/source creation with nothing given to a user. Bye, Milan _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers mailing list evolution-hackers@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers