From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8827740556599092120==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Marcel Holtmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] doc: Add documentation for 'forced-mode' Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:31:07 +0100 Message-ID: <1295382667.3873.227.camel@aeonflux> In-Reply-To: List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============8827740556599092120== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Aki, > >> + "auto" Network registration is p= erformed > >> + automatically. > >> + "forced-auto" Network registration is p= erformed > >> + automatically while manual > >> + selection is disabled. > > > > we need to discuss this a little bit. I am not sure using a mode of > > forced auto is the best choice here. > > > > Maybe an extra property like "ManualAllowed" would be better. Thoughts? > = > The reason I ended up extending the Mode property was that once > forced_auto is true, no other Mode than auto is anyway possible. So in > a sense it is another type of Mode, which isn't to say a separate > property wouldn't work equally well. > = > I'm really open to either option. The way the code is written makes it > very easy to just expose this as a separate property. the extra "forced-auto" mode feels kinda forced into this property. So that is my main concern here. However on the other hand the Mode property is actually read-only. If it would be a user changeable property then it would be pretty clear that we do not wanna intermix this here. With this in mind, it might be just fine here from a UI interaction flow point of view. Denis, what is your take on this? And while thinking about this, now I have another question. If this flag is set on the SIM card, are you allowed to deregister from the network? Regards Marcel --===============8827740556599092120==--