Closed
Bug 270903
Opened 20 years ago
Closed 20 years ago
calICalendar updates
Categories
(Calendar :: General, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: vlad, Assigned: dmosedale)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 2 obsolete files)
|
12.68 KB,
patch
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Updates to calICalendar.idl as per irc discussion; some cleanup on the item getters and some other bits.
| Reporter | ||
Comment 1•20 years ago
|
||
| Reporter | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #166532 -
Flags: second-review?(shaver)
Attachment #166532 -
Flags: first-review?(dmose)
| Assignee | ||
Comment 2•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 166532 [details] [diff] [review] calICalendar.idl.patches >+ * parameters: >+ * >+ * - aOperationType: calIOperationListener::ADD >+ * - aId: the ID of the newly added item >+ * - aStatus: nsresult code indicating the result of operation >+ * - aDetail: the calIItemBase corresponding to the immutable >+ * version of the newly added item I'd suggest dropping the above documentation. This stuff is already documented in calIOperationListener, and keeping one piece of documentation up-to-date is generally hard enough; keeping two up-to-date and in-sync is asking for trouble, I think. Just referring the reader to calIOperationListener should be sufficient, I think. Same with the analogous commentary in the other methods here. >+ * If the generation of the given aItem does not match the generation >+ * of the internal item (indicating that someone else modified the >+ * item), onOperationComplete is called with a status of NS_ERROR_XXXXX >+ * and aDetail is set to the latest-version internal immutable item. Seems like there is some overlap in funcationality between lastModifiedTime and generation. Do we actually need both? Also, please add your name to the license boilerplate.
Attachment #166532 -
Flags: first-review?(dmose) → first-review-
Comment 3•20 years ago
|
||
Those comments don't duplicate the calIOperationListener documentation though, which latter comments don't tell you, for example, what the meaning of aDetail is in response to a given operation.
Comment 4•20 years ago
|
||
Yes, we need both a sync generation and lastModifiedTime -- relying on globally-synchronized clocks to detect lost updates is a recipe for purest pain. (Even, it turns out, on atomic-clock-sync'd-clusters.)
| Assignee | ||
Comment 5•20 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #3) > Those comments don't duplicate the calIOperationListener documentation though, > which latter comments don't tell you, for example, what the meaning of aDetail > is in response to a given operation. Ah, true. Better keep that and any other non-duplicated info, then.
Comment 6•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 166532 [details] [diff] [review] calICalendar.idl.patches >Index: calICalendar.idl >+ * @param aCount Maximum number of items to return. What if i want all the items? Pass 0?
| Reporter | ||
Comment 7•20 years ago
|
||
Updated as per comments; removed duplicate documentation about various params. Also added note about aCount (set to 0 for unbounded query).
Attachment #166532 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
| Reporter | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #166801 -
Flags: first-review?(dmose)
| Assignee | ||
Comment 8•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 166801 [details] [diff] [review] 270903-calicalendar-1.patch r=dmose
Attachment #166801 -
Flags: first-review?(dmose) → first-review+
| Reporter | ||
Comment 9•20 years ago
|
||
Moved the aStatus parameter to the two listener callbacks to always be the first param, for consistency.
Attachment #166801 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
| Reporter | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #166808 -
Flags: first-review?(dmose)
| Reporter | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 20 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Comment 10•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 166532 [details] [diff] [review] calICalendar.idl.patches patch is obsolete, removing review request.
Attachment #166532 -
Flags: second-review?(shaver)
| Assignee | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #166808 -
Flags: first-review?(dmose)
Comment 11•18 years ago
|
||
The bugspam monkeys have been set free and are feeding on Calendar :: General. Be afraid for your sanity!
QA Contact: gurganbl → general
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•