[sword-devel] [bt-devel] Bibletime 2.0.alpha3 FTBFS with sword 1.6.0RC1 library

[Manfred Bergmann]

Am 23.04.2009 um 10:29 schrieb Manfred Bergmann:

>
> Am 21.04.2009 um 16:24 schrieb Troy A. Griffitts:
>
>> Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:
>>> Unfortunately I have to destroy your hope here: we have only the  
>>> static warning which doesn't have to be agreed. But I have already  
>>> planned replacing it with a dynamic warning.
>>>
>>> There is virtual int refreshRemoteSourceConfiguration(). Would it  
>>> be enough if I override it, opening a dialog etc.? Now I just use  
>>> setUserDisclaimerConfirmed(bool val). Is it so that the library  
>>> calls refreshRemoteSourceConfiguration() before every network  
>>> transaction? And what is the int return value?
>>
>> Eeli,
>>
>> All the InstallMgr calls which perform remote access now check if  
>> bool isUserDisclaimerConfirmed() returns true before performing  
>> their operation.
>> Would it be useful to you, as a frontend programmer wishing to  
>> satisfy this criteria in Bibletime, to have  
>> isUserDisclaimerConfirmed be made a virtual method, which always  
>> returns false in the default impl (not pure virtual since  
>> installmgr can still be useful for local/CD installation).  Then we  
>> would remove setUserDisclaimerConfirmed(bool).
>>
>> This would essential mandate a best practices methodology for  
>> confirming that the user has accepted the disclaimer.  Something  
>> like:
>>
>> bool MyInstallMgr::isUserDisclaimerConfirmed() {
>>  static bool confirmed = false;
>>  if (!confirmed) {
>>     confirmed = (showDisclaimerDialog() == mbOk);
>>  }
>> }
>>
>> Then the first time the user attempts a remote activity, InstallMgr  
>> checks isUserDisclaimerConfirmed() and your confirmation method is  
>> shown.  Obviously, if you'd rather choose to show the disclaimer at  
>> an earlier point, you can always call isUserDisclaimerConfirmed()  
>> yourself to trigger your confirmation method.
>
> I noticed the setUserDisclaimerConfirmed(bool) has been removed.
> How can I set this now?

So I need to subclass InstallMgr now?
Hmm, not sure I like it, means more code an an additional class just  
to return a true here.


Manfred