Re: [SyncEvolution] status (error) value constraints
On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 10:54 +0000, Jussi Kukkonen wrote:
I've phrased these as questions so no-one takes these as
explanations of
status quo: I really couldn't tell what to expect.
* if there is a non-zero source status, will sync status be non-zero?
Yes.
* Can there be different sources with different non-zero source
status
codes in a single sync?
Yes. To give one example, the uri in addressbook might be wrong (=> 404,
or something like it) and the server might fail to process and item sent
for calendar (=> 500, depending on server).
* StatusChanged signal can obviously include zero status and later
non-zero status. Can one source have several non-zero statuses (as in
0 -> LOCERR_USERSUSPEND -> LOCERR_TIMEOUT)?
Not with the current implementation. But I would prefer to not make that
part of the API description. Is that a problem the the UI?
* Are the last StatusChanged status codes the same as the ones in
the
sync report that will be available?
Yes.
* Are there other "non-error" status codes in addition to
these:
LOCERR_USERABORT, LOCERR_USERSUSPEND?
Can't think of one right now.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.