Re: Why V3
On Sun Aug 12 2012 Sriram Karra wrote: > OK what you are saying is v2 allows single notes string field, but > a list of cons pairs is still valid in v2, right? Correct (to the best of my knowledge of v2) > So a v3 "unmigrate" features that leaves the notes field as it is > in v3 (list of cons pairs) would still produce a valid v2 > database. I believe so. > So yeah, an unmigrate feature certainly looks easily > implementable. I assume so, too. -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: Why V3 (Was: Re: Fwd: BBDB development shifted from sourceforge to savannah)
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Roland Winkler wrote: > > Also, there is one Notes field in each record which usually holds > the list of note fields, which in turn are cons pairs (KEY . VALUE). > Some pieces of BBDB v2 also allowed the Notes field to be a single > string, instead of the list of cons pairs. I do not know whether > this was just a historical thing left over in the code, or whether > this was still a fully supported feature. V3 definitely relies on > having a list of cons pairs (KEY . VALUE) in the Notes field and > bbdb-migrate converts a single Notes string accordingly. Obviously, > going back to a Notes field with a single string would break pretty > much everything. > OK what you are saying is v2 allows single notes string field, but a list of cons pairs is still valid in v2, right? So a v3 "unmigrate" features that leaves the notes field as it is in v3 (list of cons pairs) would still produce a valid v2 database. So yeah, an unmigrate feature certainly looks easily implementable. I'd probably do it one of these days... -Karra -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: Why V3 (Was: Re: Fwd: BBDB development shifted from sourceforge to savannah)
On Sat Aug 11 2012 Sriram Karra wrote: > Further, "throwing them away" could just be stashing the fields > into the notes list. Certainly. But if you then decide to give v3 a second try, you will not get back what you had before. > Just for the record, can you tell us about all the changes in the > file format? I know: > > - a new field called "affix" now appears as the third field of the record > - organizations is a list instead of a ';' delimited string. The above is correct. Also, there is one Notes field in each record which usually holds the list of note fields, which in turn are cons pairs (KEY . VALUE). Some pieces of BBDB v2 also allowed the Notes field to be a single string, instead of the list of cons pairs. I do not know whether this was just a historical thing left over in the code, or whether this was still a fully supported feature. V3 definitely relies on having a list of cons pairs (KEY . VALUE) in the Notes field and bbdb-migrate converts a single Notes string accordingly. Obviously, going back to a Notes field with a single string would break pretty much everything. For the other things, someone could write a function bbdb-unmigrate to go back to v2 and post it here. -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: Why V3 (Was: Re: Fwd: BBDB development shifted from sourceforge to savannah)
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 1:11 AM, Roland Winkler wrote: > 2. If I use BBDB v3 and don't like it can I go back to v2 > > #2 can and should get fixed. I find it quite amusing in fact, the > > bbdb-migrate stuff has always had the hooks to downgrade to an > > earlier file format version - until now, i.e., when it is needed > > more than ever before really :) One of these days... > > Well, the new format allows you to do things you could not do with > the old format. So going back to v2 is only possible by throwing > away the incompatible extensions in the format of v3. I do not > consider this a satisfactory procedure. > Given v2 does not know what to do this with these incompatible extensions, isn't throwing them away a non-issue if what the user really wants is to go back to V2? Further, "throwing them away" could just be stashing the fields into the notes list. Just for the record, can you tell us about all the changes in the file format? I know: - a new field called "affix" now appears as the third field of the record - organizations is a list instead of a ';' delimited string. -Sriram > > Of course, anyone switching from v2 to v3 should first make a copy > of his or her old database. Then if things do not work out for > whatever reason you can fully go back. > > Roland > -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: Why V3 (Was: Re: Fwd: BBDB development shifted from sourceforge to savannah)
On Sat Aug 11 2012 Sriram Karra wrote: > I have rewritten along lines you have suggested and pushed it. Please take a > look. Looks fine to me, thanks, > Backwards compatibility for me would mean a few distinct things: > > 1. Will my old customizations work with the new code > #1 might never get fixed given the direction we've headed. My intention has been to make the concepts more transparent. So yes, making old customizations work in an automated would be very difficult. > 2. If I use BBDB v3 and don't like it can I go back to v2 > #2 can and should get fixed. I find it quite amusing in fact, the > bbdb-migrate stuff has always had the hooks to downgrade to an > earlier file format version - until now, i.e., when it is needed > more than ever before really :) One of these days... Well, the new format allows you to do things you could not do with the old format. So going back to v2 is only possible by throwing away the incompatible extensions in the format of v3. I do not consider this a satisfactory procedure. Of course, anyone switching from v2 to v3 should first make a copy of his or her old database. Then if things do not work out for whatever reason you can fully go back. Roland -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: Why V3 (Was: Re: Fwd: BBDB development shifted from sourceforge to savannah)
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Roland Winkler wrote: > > Thanks a lot for doing this. Two things: > > - My first name is Roland > Ah, indeed :) > - I suggest to replace the 2nd paragraph by something like the > following > I have rewritten along lines you have suggested and pushed it. Please take a look. > You also mentioned "backward compatibility" that should / could be > addressed. I do not know what this could mean more specifically. > (I do not expect it will ever be feasible / useful to provide a > "compatiblity mode" that allows a user of v2 to switch to v3 without > worrying about anything.) > Backwards compatibility for me would mean a few distinct things: 1. Will my old customizations work with the new code 2. If I use BBDB v3 and don't like it can I go back to v2 v3 fails the test on both counts. #1 might never get fixed given the direction we've headed. #2 can and should get fixed. I find it quite amusing in fact, the bbdb-migrate stuff has always had the hooks to downgrade to an earlier file format version - until now, i.e., when it is needed more than ever before really :) One of these days... -Karra -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: Why V3 (Was: Re: Fwd: BBDB development shifted from sourceforge to savannah)
On Fri Aug 10 2012 Sriram Karra wrote: > I have updated site (http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/) with a note > pointing to Savannah. That done, I now feel it is best to just > leave that site alone. Any FAQ etc. should reside on the Savannah > site. Thoughts? Thanks a lot for doing this. Two things: - My first name is Roland - I suggest to replace the 2nd paragraph by something like the following It is important to note that at the moment v3 can import a BBDB database from v2. Also, most concepts of the user interface have been preserved (plus many new concepts have been added to make BBDB yet more powerful). However, beyond this point v3 is not backwards compatible with v2. A database from v3 cannot be used with v2. Also, the names of many commands and user variables have been changed and v3 currently does not support Xemacs. Therefore, the rest of the page below will be kept around "in state" at least till support for Xemacs has been addressed somehow. You also mentioned "backward compatibility" that should / could be addressed. I do not know what this could mean more specifically. (I do not expect it will ever be feasible / useful to provide a "compatiblity mode" that allows a user of v2 to switch to v3 without worrying about anything.) Roland -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: Why V3 (Was: Re: Fwd: BBDB development shifted from sourceforge to savannah)
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 2:56 AM, Roland Winkler wrote: > > > I would like to capture this question and a summary of your > > answers as a FAQ on the updated project site on sourceforge. > > Thanks a lot, that will be helpful I have updated site (http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/) with a note pointing to Savannah. That done, I now feel it is best to just leave that site alone. Any FAQ etc. should reside on the Savannah site. Thoughts? -Karra -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: Why V3
On Sat Jul 7 2012 Johnny wrote: > > By now, unless someone on this list brings up problems with BBDB v3 > > that remained unnoticed so far, I do not have plans to further > > modify the code of BBDB (except for fixing docstrings that could > > still be buggy / incomplete). In particular, I do not want to > > introduce any additional incompatible changes beyond the ones > > present in the current code. > > I would really like to see the compatibility with lookout.el and csv.el > to be restored, if possible. This is the only way I see now for contacts > import/export with Outlook, unless on a Windows machine. [1] [2] You are right! I believe there are various add-ons to BBDB including and beyond lookout.el and csv.el that have not yet been properly ported to BBDB 3. When I wrote the above, I had in mind the core functions of BBDB as implemented in bbdb.el, bbdb-com.el and bbdb-mua.el. Add-ons to BBDB should be able to rely on these core functions once BBDB 3 is released. (There is a small but nonzero probability that updating one or the other BBDB add-on reveals that some core function should have been implemented differently. -- Oh well, I do not know all the add-ons so well, and only a regular user of an add-on might notice certain things. So that's really where I would appreciate input from the BBDB user community.) Roland -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: Why V3
Hi Roland, Sorry to drag this up again, but... "Roland Winkler" writes: > By now, unless someone on this list brings up problems with BBDB v3 > that remained unnoticed so far, I do not have plans to further > modify the code of BBDB (except for fixing docstrings that could > still be buggy / incomplete). In particular, I do not want to > introduce any additional incompatible changes beyond the ones > present in the current code. I would really like to see the compatibility with lookout.el and csv.el to be restored, if possible. This is the only way I see now for contacts import/export with Outlook, unless on a Windows machine. [1] [2] Thanks for your consideration! Footnotes: [1] http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/BbdbImporters#toc7 [2] http://www.mail-archive.com.ar/bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net/msg05708.html -- Johnny -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Re: Why V3
> Roland Winkler writes: > By now, unless someone on this list brings up problems with BBDB v3 that > remained unnoticed so far, I do not have plans to further modify the code of > BBDB (except for fixing docstrings that could still be buggy / > incomplete). In particular, I do not want to introduce any additional > incompatible changes beyond the ones present in the current code. I've been using BBDB v3 for a while, and all that code that I write uses its APIs. No problems thus far. John -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Why V3 (Was: Re: Fwd: BBDB development shifted from sourceforge to savannah)
On Thu Jun 21 2012 Sriram Karra wrote: > Perhaps now is a good time for me to ask this question that's been > on my mind for a while: Apart from an extensive code cleanup, are > there any other things to look forward to with your upcoming > release? This is particularly important given the level of > breakage in user customization and general backward compatibility > (relative to 2.x). Of course, once BBDB v3 is released, users need to be able to rely on the new design. For me, this has been a major reason that delayed an earlier release: Turning BBDB around once must be enough. So I wanted to do this carefully. By now, unless someone on this list brings up problems with BBDB v3 that remained unnoticed so far, I do not have plans to further modify the code of BBDB (except for fixing docstrings that could still be buggy / incomplete). In particular, I do not want to introduce any additional incompatible changes beyond the ones present in the current code. > I would like to capture this question and a summary of your > answers as a FAQ on the updated project site on sourceforge. Thanks a lot, that will be helpful! Roland -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
Why V3 (Was: Re: Fwd: BBDB development shifted from sourceforge to savannah)
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 1:17 AM, Roland Winkler wrote: > > PS: I hope that in a few days I can submit my recent work on BBDB. I > just need to summarize things in the ChangeLog. > Great! Perhaps now is a good time for me to ask this question that's been on my mind for a while: Apart from an extensive code cleanup, are there any other things to look forward to with your upcoming release? This is particularly important given the level of breakage in user customization and general backward compatibility (relative to 2.x). I would like to capture this question and a summary of your answers as a FAQ on the updated project site on sourceforge. -Karra -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/___ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
