Re: 5ac064e7: Attention API for nudges/buzzes/zaps of …
deckrider at gmail.com
Mon Aug 27 14:34:33 EDT 2007
On 8/26/07, Ethan Blanton <elb at pidgin.im> wrote:
> Jeff Connelly spake unto us the following wisdom:
> > > On 8/26/07, Sadrul Habib Chowdhury <imadil at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Instead of having the new signals, would it be enough to use the
> > > existing receiving|received-im-msg signals, and set an appropriate flag
> > > (eg. PURPLE_MESSAGE_ATTENTION) so that a plugin/UI can treat it
> > > differently if it wants to, otherwise just handle it as any other
> > > incoming/outgoing message? I think that would be simpler and
> > > 'backward-compatible'.
> > I did this and was able to cut out a lot of code.
> > I was going off the suggestion at
> > http://pidgin.im/pipermail/devel/2007-August/002649.html but I agree a
> > flag would be better. We'll have to see if deck rider, Ethan, and John
> > agree.
> As best I can see, this solves the problem deckrider was wanting to
> solve, right? It can still be effectively ignored.
Sounds right to me, Bot Sentry is already using 'receiving-im-msg', so
if that is now used also for 'attention' events it would be great.
I should note that one thing Bot Sentry does is check to see if there
is a PurpleConversation already, and if so, let it through without any
impediments, so hopfully these 'attention' events won't preemptively
open one before this signal.
More information about the Devel