From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6216613726321932076==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Marcel Holtmann Subject: Re: Please comment on callhistory API Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:21:22 +0900 Message-ID: <1285626082.9845.16.camel@aeonflux> In-Reply-To: <4CA100DF.40402@intel.com> List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============6216613726321932076== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Raji, this is the second time I have to remind you to not top post. Next time I will ignore your email. Just a friendly reminder to follow proper mailing list etiquette. > org.ofono.History will be the main adapter interface and = > org.ofono.CallHistoryAgent the callhistory agent and = > org.ofono.SmsHistoryAgent as the sms history agent. I want to seperate = > the two agents so that sms app will expose sms history agent and dialer = > will register and expose callhistory agent. Then it will be clear which = > agent is interested in which history, vs one org.ofono.HistoryAgent = > exposing ReportCall and ReportTextMessage methods. In the later case = > adapter needs to flush both smshistory and callsistory onto two agents = > even though agents are not interested only in type of history. actually not really. So why does the dialer and SMS application need to register for the history? Isn't that going to be stored central in Tracker or something similar. Should not be Tracker or some Tracker helper be registering the agent? I might be wrong, but does it really make sense to separate it on this level? And it needs to be MessageHistoryAgent if we decide to go for this. We banned the shortcut "sms" from the rest of the API. Regards Marcel --===============6216613726321932076==--