api: Add Viewtype::Vcard and parse_vcard() #5536
Conversation
Hocuri
force-pushed
the
iequidoo/vcard
branch
3 times, most recently
from
62b17f8
to
2454eaa
Compare
Hocuri
changed the title
Hocuri
force-pushed
the
iequidoo/vcard
branch
2 times, most recently
from
adc6e54
to
6ac9757
Compare
|
So let it be called |
I think I prefer create_vcard over make_vcard, but it doesn't matter much, if you want to really think deeply about the name then probably something like get_vcard_for_contact() is a better name than the other two names |
(never mind, I was thinking by the name of this PR it was only about adding vcard view type and displaying but now import/export api is also being added in this same PR) |
Now it can be merged. I think it's better to merge what is already working, at least to avoid further conflicts |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
About the commit messages:
- Probably (not completely sure) the prefix should be
api:, instead offeat:because these two commits not only add a new feature but even a new api - "feat(jsonrpc): Add a function parsing a vCard file at the given path": This should mention the name of the added function, i.e. something like
api(jsonrpc): Add parse_vcard() that can parse the file attached to a Viewtype::Vcardorapi(jsonrpc): Add parse_vcard()or so
deltachat-contact-tools/src/lib.rs
Outdated
| /// Name authorized by the contact itself, vcard property `fn`. Can be empty, one should use | ||
| /// `display_name()` to obtain the display name. | ||
| pub authname: String, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a note, nothing blocking: It's not actually "authorized by the contact itself", because vCards are sent by a third party (even though AFAIK it's true that the authname in contact.rs has the same semantics). And the code handling authnames in contact.rs is a bit far away, while this crate here is only concerned with parsing vCards.
Since i agree that display_name is something else in DeltaChat land, I would slightly be in favor of calling this field simply name, but feel free to ignore this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd avoid using name/display_name to protect from occasional sharing of locally given names. With authname the code in the deltachat core looks just straightforward. But public_name/shared_name would be also ok. Anyway i agree that the comment should be fixed
iequidoo
force-pushed
the
iequidoo/vcard
branch
2 times, most recently
from
9e6728e
to
eec0c0f
Compare
Add a function parsing a vCard file at the given path. Co-authored-by: Hocuri <hocuri@gmx.de> Co-authored-by: Asiel Díaz Benítez <asieldbenitez@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Hocuri <hocuri@gmx.de>
It's actually `deltachat::contact::Contact::authname` by semantics. `display_name`/`name` shouldn't be shared, it's the name given by the user locally.
- u64 only adds unnecessary conversions. - `Contact::last_seen` is also `i64`, so make timestamps such everywhere.
|
Dale fotto. Seguro. Mo. Es tuyo |
|
Forro segui. Con tus chat Forro |
Part of #5422
Closes #5204