Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1256023119.9142.19.camel@pohly-mobl1.ikn.intel.com> References: <1256007499-19250-1-git-send-email-forrest.zhao@intel.com> <1256023119.9142.19.camel@pohly-mobl1.ikn.intel.com> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:05:31 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implements the OBEX server/SyncML client binding for syncEvolution (http://syncevolution.org/). From: Zhao Forrest To: Patrick Ohly Cc: "Zhao, Forrest" , "linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: >> --- a/src/main.c >> +++ b/src/main.c >> @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ >> ?#define OPP_CHANNEL ? ?9 >> ?#define FTP_CHANNEL ? ?10 >> ?#define PBAP_CHANNEL ? 15 >> +#define SYNCEVOLUTION_CHANNEL ?16 >> ?#define PCSUITE_CHANNEL ? ? ? ?24 > > Do we want to call this "SYNCEVOLUTION" or "SYNCML"? Both has pros and > cons. Treating it as generic SyncML capability hides the detail that > it's currently based on SyncEvolution. Exposing SyncEvolution itself > would allow to activate multiple different SyncML implementations at the > same time. > > My preference would be to keep it as is, but I wanted to ask anyway. I have the same idea as you do, and prefer to keep it as "SYNCEVOLUTION". > > Off topic: what is the "PC Suite Services server"? > It's Nokia OBEX PC Suite Services. Johan may know more details about it. >> + ? ? ? { "syncevolution", 'e', 0, G_OPTION_ARG_NONE, &option_syncevolution, >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? "Enable OBEX server for Syncevolution client" }, > > Mind the spelling: "syncevolution" (lower case) is the command line > tool, "SyncEvolution" (camel case) the project. "Syncevolution" is a > typo ;-) > Will fix it ASAP. > Is there documentation that should be updated together with introducing > the new feature? The patch does not introduce any new d-bus API to obexd, so no doc need to be updated. > >> + ? ? ? if (option_syncevolution == TRUE) { >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? services |= OBEX_SYNCEVOLUTION; >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? bluetooth_init(OBEX_SYNCEVOLUTION, "OBEX server for" >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? " Syncevolution client", NULL, >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? SYNCEVOLUTION_CHANNEL, TRUE, FALSE, FALSE, >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? NULL); >> + ? ? ? } >> + > > Which string is going to appear in the service description (the SDP > part)? This one here? Mentioning "SyncML" would be useful. So I suggest > "OBEX server for SyncML, using SyncEvolution". Leave out the > "SyncEvolution client", because the term client is a) overloaded > (SyncML/OBEX/D-Bus) and b) SyncEvolution could be both client and server > in this context (SAN => SyncML client, SyncML message => SyncML server). > OK. Will expose service name as "OBEX server for SyncML, using SyncEvolution" since ProviderName attribute is not supported by obexd now.