simon.mcvittie at collabora.co.uk
Thu Nov 26 03:03:45 PST 2009
On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 at 12:56:26 +1100, Danielle Madeley wrote:
> So, following on from discussion today, the consensus was that this is
> fundamentally a pointless requirement
I disagree. Let's discuss this on the bug so there's a good record of the
> Passing channels off from a transient Handler to a more long-term
> Handler can be handled internally by the application. I think a
> GList *tp_handler_get_handled_channels (TpHandler *) and
> tp_handler_handling_channel (TpHandler *, TpChannel *)
> will suffice here.
I don't think it should be necessary to hand off channels between handlers
that live on the same unique name explicitly, and that's the intention
of the spec.
Handlers that don't live on the same unique name can't hand off channels
between themselves without adding API to the ChannelDispatcher, so we shouldn't
allow that in the C API until the ChannelDispatcher actually gains that D-Bus
API. I'll clone your bug to represent it.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 793 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/telepathy/attachments/20091126/28751111/attachment.pgp
More information about the telepathy