[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: BBDB or BADB (born again database)

From: Roland Winkler
Subject: Re: BBDB or BADB (born again database)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 17:06:10 -0500

I suggest to continue these discussions on the list
address@hidden that is better suited for this.

On Tue May 18 2010 Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> I've tried to do some minor BBDB hacking, mainly just maintenance to
> keep the Debian package working, and have my current version in
> but it sounds like what you've done is the right thing.

Thank you. -- I'll take a look at this page. Possibly some of your
patches might be obsolete for my version.

> Unless you object, I'll put your version on a branch in that repo.
> This would be easier if you were to tell me which exact point you
> branched off from.

That's fine with me.

I already discovered some minor bugs in the version that I posted on
gnu-emacs-sources and I am sure there will be more. It will probably
be best to put my code in some openly accessible version control
system. (I do not know anything about such systems. I am a happy
user of RCS for my small projects.)

I have contacted the current official maintainer of BBDB. But up to
now I did not get any response.

> Also: care to try for a merge?  It sounds like your version would be
> more suitable for the Debian bbdb package; does that sound right
> to you?

Again, that's certainly fine with me. (I'll look at this.)

> Where did you put the defun of bbdb-record-notes ? It's gone from
> bbdb.el, yet is still used by bbdb-record-note etc.

The old BBDB distinguished between "notes" and "raw-notes". This
distinction does not exist anymore in my code. So bbdb-record-notes
is directly defined by the macro bbdb-defstruct.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]