[Syncevolution-issues] [Bug 7089] pairing with Bluetooth devices

> > Let's explore the control flow without API changes first: Patricks list seems pretty good to me. > > - bluetooth panel plugin finds new device with SyncML > > - user chooses to invoke SyncEvolution for it > > - "sync-ui --show-settings obex+bluetooth://<mac address>" > > - sync-ui checks existing configs for one with that syncURL > > - if found, make select that config > > Wondering whether this is necessary. Device pairing is the first time > SyncEvolution sees the device, there should not be existing configs for the > device. When user decides to remove pairing, the configs is also removed > during the un-pairing process. I don't think we can trust on no configs existing. I also don't think the un-pairing process should remove configs: un-pairing happens in bluetooth-applet and syncevolution should find about it next time it tries to do something -- it could check for pairing status in GetConfigs and either remove the config if peer is not paired or just not return it to client. > > - if not, ask for templates > > - syncevo-dbus-server returns built-in templates for HTTP servers, > > plus templates for all paired Bluetooth peers (more than one > > template per peer, ranked according to matching criteria) > > - sync-ui searches for the syncURL to find templates for the right > > device and presents those first > > Do we need to display any templates that does not match via SyncURL? I don't > think so. I disagree. The configuration list should be just as it would be if user opened it herself. The only difference, if possible, should be that the correct peer is opened already. Anything else would be inconsistent. > > The sync-ui must be fairly flexible with the --show-settings parameter. It > > might also support template names, config names and a "fuzzy" syncURL > > matching where only the prefix is checked (ignore channel number and HTTP > > URL parameters). > > > > We discussed this ranking before. We could go one step further and return > > *all* phone templates for each peer, even if they don't match at all. Then > > the GUI has all information and can let the user choose freely. This is actually close to my original idea: at this point the UI could do the actual selection with e.g. a "phone model name" filter if the templates include That should work without API changes, if we are fine with returning lots of templates in GetConfigs...

The reason I'd be fine with just (ab)using the current API is that we don't really know how this will work... It might be worth it to wait for a while, and see how many templates we end up with and how easy/hard the matching is.