[Telepathy-commits] [telepathy-spec/master] Recommend not passing suppress_handler=FALSE to RequestChannel, ever
Simon McVittie
simon.mcvittie at collabora.co.uk
Wed Aug 27 07:54:10 PDT 2008
Signed-Off-By: spec design meeting 2008-08-26
---
spec/Connection.xml | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/spec/Connection.xml b/spec/Connection.xml
index 4dac8d0..a5bc084 100644
--- a/spec/Connection.xml
+++ b/spec/Connection.xml
@@ -360,9 +360,32 @@ USA.</p>
<arg direction="in" name="suppress_handler" type="b">
<tp:docstring>
- If true, the requesting client intends to take responsibility for
- displaying the channel to the user, so no other handler needs to
- be launched
+ <p>Clients SHOULD always set this to true.</p>
+
+ <tp:rationale>
+ <p>The historical meaning was that clients that did not
+ intend to take responsibility for displaying the channel to
+ the user could set this to FALSE, in which case the channel
+ dispatcher would launch an appropriate channel handler.</p>
+
+ <p>However, clients whose functionality relies on having a
+ working channel dispatcher should obtain that functionality by
+ calling methods on the channel dispatcher, so that they will
+ get an appropriate error if the channel dispatcher is missing
+ or not working.</p>
+
+ <p>The channel dispatcher itself should set this to true too,
+ so that it will ignore the
+ <tp:member-ref>NewChannel</tp:member-ref> signal that results
+ from the creation of the channel. It can then dispatch the
+ channel returned from this method to an
+ appropriate handler.</p>
+
+ <p>So, there is no sensible use-case for setting this to false,
+ and setting it to false can result in unhandled channels (in
+ the case where clients assume that a channel dispatcher is
+ present, but it isn't).</p>
+ </tp:rationale>
</tp:docstring>
</arg>
--
1.5.6.3
More information about the Telepathy-commits
mailing list