After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 631362 - Google backend for e-d-s fails to build due to libgdata API break
Google backend for e-d-s fails to build due to libgdata API break
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 630358
Product: evolution-data-server
Classification: Platform
Component: Contacts
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-addressbook-maintainers
Evolution QA team
evolution[google]
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2010-10-04 22:54 UTC by Travis Reitter
Modified: 2010-10-20 12:32 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
Update for API break (726 bytes, patch)
2010-10-04 22:54 UTC, Travis Reitter
none Details | Review

Description Travis Reitter 2010-10-04 22:54:25 UTC
Created attachment 171727 [details] [review]
Update for API break

ligdata recently removed the function gdata_contacts_service_update_contact(), in favor of gdata_service_update_entry(). This breaks the build of e-d-s.

This patch switches to the new function, though I'm not familiar with the code involved; it might not necessarily be correct.
Comment 1 Matthew Barnes 2010-10-05 01:23:24 UTC
Do you know in what version of libgdata the API break occurred?

If it's a post-GNOME 2.32 version, we'll need to support both APIs for awhile.
Comment 2 Travis Reitter 2010-10-05 05:10:23 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> Do you know in what version of libgdata the API break occurred?

It looks like it's just happened in master:

http://git.gnome.org/browse/libgdata/commit/?id=9bcac38a8819608633c24045df4098bbd4e0ae4b

At quick glance, I didn't see that commit in the 0.6 branch.

Philip is CC'd, so he should know.
Comment 3 Philip Withnall 2010-10-05 08:26:42 UTC
The patch looks correct.

(In reply to comment #1)
> Do you know in what version of libgdata the API break occurred?

Master (which will become 0.7) has broken a lot of API, and I've got a few more breaks planned.

If I can get all the breaks I want done with 0.7, then hopefully libgdata can head towards being API stable in 0.8 → 1.0.

> If it's a post-GNOME 2.32 version, we'll need to support both APIs for awhile.

I'm hoping that 0.7 will ship with GNOME 3.0.

Sorry for the pain.
Comment 4 Matthew Barnes 2010-10-05 11:56:35 UTC
In that case I'm leaning towards restricting our support to 0.6.3 <= libgdata < 0.7 until 0.7 is out, and then possibly supporting both APIs (if it's not too painful) until 0.7 finds its way into a stable GNOME release.
Comment 5 Philip Withnall 2010-10-05 13:27:57 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> In that case I'm leaning towards restricting our support to 0.6.3 <= libgdata <
> 0.7 until 0.7 is out, and then possibly supporting both APIs (if it's not too
> painful) until 0.7 finds its way into a stable GNOME release.

That sounds reasonable. Supporting both APIs would probably require a number of #ifdefs, but not an excessive number.
Comment 6 Matthew Barnes 2010-10-05 15:37:25 UTC
I limited the supported libgdata version to 0.6 on master and gnome-2-32 with slightly different wordings.  We won't support libgdata 0.7 on the gnome-2-32 branch, but we may add support on the master branch once 0.7 is released.

http://git.gnome.org/browse/evolution-data-server/commit/?id=821747af30cb25382b35dc8845c9bac154e21603

http://git.gnome.org/browse/evolution-data-server/commit/?h=gnome-2-32&id=3a2047f7dc805c83d2ec1da54ac181401dee8d3c

Leaving this bug open since we'll still have to deal with the API breaks eventually.  I'm just kicking the can down the road.
Comment 7 Philip Withnall 2010-10-17 15:56:20 UTC
libgdata 0.7.0 has now been released. :-)
Comment 8 Milan Crha 2010-10-20 12:32:45 UTC
(In reply to comment #7)
> libgdata 0.7.0 has now been released. :-)

... and this was addressed within bug #630358, together with the gdata_query_set_updated_min change. I'm marking this as a duplicate of the older bug.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 630358 ***