Direct IM requests and the Request API

[Evan Schoenberg]

On Apr 24, 2007, at 2:34 AM, Mark Doliner wrote:

> I think adding a new UI op would be ok as long as it's added to the  
> end of the
> struct, but modifying an existing one would not be ok.

Then: existing UI ops can be modified... when?  Now? After 2.0.0 and  
only if we agree we want to move to a 3.0.0? Never? Some other time?

I think part of a full solution is that requests should always have  
computer-readable data about the buddy/account for which the request  
is issued if possible; this provides the UI a chance to associate the  
request with a conversation.  This would be a change to the existing  
UI ops.

Thanks,
Evan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://pidgin.im/pipermail/devel/attachments/20070424/df6f0c5d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://pidgin.im/pipermail/devel/attachments/20070424/df6f0c5d/attachment.sig>