Re: [PATCH obexd] Show owner vcard in phonebook pb pull

Hi Radek,

On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Radek [off-list ref] wrote:

Hi Luiz,

On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Luiz Augusto von Dentz
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Hi Radek,

On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Radoslaw Jablonski
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Previously 'owner' vcard was visible in vcardlisting of 'pb'
but not in result of pull 'pb' phonebook.
Due to that, vcardlisting and pull operations were returning
different number of results(also return values of PhonebookSize
request were inconsistent)
---
 plugins/phonebook-tracker.c |    2 --
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/plugins/phonebook-tracker.c b/plugins/phonebook-tracker.c
index d1f4cd7..29dd05c 100644
--- a/plugins/phonebook-tracker.c
+++ b/plugins/phonebook-tracker.c

@@ -139,7 +139,6 @@

 "WHERE {"                                                              \
 "      ?_contact a nco:PersonContact ."                                \
 "      OPTIONAL {?_contact nco:hasAffiliation ?_role .}"               \
-"      FILTER (regex(str(?_contact), \"urn:uuid:\"))"                  \
 "}"                                                                    \
 "ORDER BY tracker:id(?_contact)"

@@ -361,7 +360,6 @@ COMBINED_CONSTRAINT         \

       "SELECT COUNT(?c) "                                             \
       "WHERE {"                                                       \
               "?c a nco:PersonContact ."                              \
-               "FILTER (regex(str(?c), \"urn:uuid:\"))"                \
       "}"

 #define MISSED_CALLS_COUNT_QUERY                                       \
--
1.7.0.4

I wonder if we came to any conclusion about having the queries in
separate files, the way it is right now the queries only works for
harmattan which makes tracker backend harmattan specific as they are
hard coded in it, it is also much more convenient for testing if you
we can just change the queries without having to recompile every time.

Yes, that makes sense. I can do little code refactoring to add "sparql query
from file" support.
But I would prefer to do little later with separate set of patches,
after this patch will be in upstream. Hope that is acceptable:)

Sure, it just came to my mind that we had discussed doing this before,
so I decided to ask about it since this is somewhat related to the
fact that we hardcoded the queries in the code.


-- 
Luiz Augusto von Dentz