Comments for Johann Prieur

Comment on pymsn article : the crack-powered address book by jprieur

jprieur — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:10:27 +0000

Hi,

I am not involved in pymsn/papyon maintenance anymore. This blog post is quite old and might be irrelevant now. The best thing to do for you is to take a look at other projects currently using papyon (telepathy-butterfly and amsn2, AFAIK), and eventually file a bug report against papyon if you’re unable to produce the desired behaviour.

Sorry I can’t help more.

Comment on pymsn article : the crack-powered address book by Der Ketzer

Der Ketzer — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 05:51:33 +0000

Dear author:

I’ve been working for about two weeks in a Messenger bot. I’m using the papyon library with python 2.5. My only problem is that I have read all the documentation that I could find, but I can’t find how to handle a new contact invitation and to auto-authorize it. I’ve achieved to retrieve all the pending emails, but again, I can’t find the correct function to add the contact to my list.

In your Post you mention the function “accept_contact_invitation(self, pending_contact, add_to_contact_list=True)”. I tried to make it work but was unsuccesfull.

I appreciate very much your help. And hope you can direct me to another page or show me how to build a contact invitation handler.

Thank You

Comment on Synchronization Vs. Direct access, the case of contacts by Jean-Marc Liotier

Jean-Marc Liotier — Thu, 14 May 2009 16:33:21 +0000

If you have a caching mechanism and an offline mode, then you have one-way synchronization from various sources to a synthetic repository fusing the disparate data.

Local availability of that data is the People project’s goal, but you can be sure that users will think about exporting their nice single repository of contacts to remote applications – maybe as vcard of hcard data obtained through the Dbus interface.

Or maybe the next step will be an Opensync connector backed by the Soylent library. Is that something that lies in the long-term roadmap, or is it expressly excluded from the feature scope ?

Comment on Where People fits in GNOME by Eric

Eric — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:03:27 +0000

You should apply to be on planet.gnome.org !!!

Comment on Where People fits in GNOME by Guyou

Guyou — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:35:43 +0000

I’ve just discovered People project. I’m quite interested in it because the giggle project has “web social” feature: it displays avatar while browsing the Git history. Currently it uses Gravatar.

Giggle can certainly become a client to People in order to remove explicit reference to Gravatar.

Comment on Looking forward to FOSDEM by Peter Saint-Andre

Peter Saint-Andre — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:20:56 +0000

Hi Johann, I'm looking forward to your participation in the XMPP Summit, too! See you in Brussels...

Comment on Looking forward to FOSDEM by jprieur

jprieur — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:16:35 +0000

People is about static contact information, not presence, and it’s meant to be pretty generic in the tiny scope of providing static contact information. From that information, applications can go further using Telepathy to get presence, Evolution to send emails, an helper library to get an avatar, a web browser to access a social network profile, etc. People won’t provide you with the result, just the basic information to get the result (it exists for that contact and those are the values you can use to exploit it). After that, you might need an activity launcher that knows what to do with that basic information to actually get the result (this is Empathy to me, in a form that makes it less an IM client only).

If we’d have go with making galago evolve, we would have end up with something similar to what has been done on Soylent/libsoylent during last Summer Of Code and before, which is for me a very ad-hoc solution and design that is limited and bound to only integrate with GNOME, has a blurry scope, and is not ambitious enough.

Whether we should add ephemeral information like presence into People has been discussed and this is not something we want, at least for now. Dynamic annotation of contact objects on the bus could prove useful though.

I’d happy to discuss that more, as I may be missing something. Thanks for your thoughts!

Comment on Looking forward to FOSDEM by Gilles Dartiguelongue

Gilles Dartiguelongue — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 07:36:41 +0000

One thing that I still don’t understand is how people is different than galago. I mean galago does presence, aggregation, connectors to eds and telepathy. What’s the difference between expending it and people ?

I ask because I worked on something like this at work for the last year and the rewrite of our tools was planned to be using galago. Besides galago is already used in some gnome applications so the only “problem” of galago is that upstream seems a bit low on activity but I bet it would be easy to take over.

Comment on Where People fits in GNOME by Looking forward to FOSDEM « postponed procrastination

Looking forward to FOSDEM « postponed procrastination — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:31:46 +0000

[...] Blog « Where People fits in GNOME [...]

Comment on Where People fits in GNOME by shivan

shivan — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:57:03 +0000

I have a small question about the use of a jabber client relying on Peolple.
jabber contacts, for me are highly tied to a server, either mine or theirs, like a server for work, and another one for personal stuff.

Empathy for example would expose a list of contacts that would be a mix of all your jabber accounts, right? What if you want to connect with only one of your account? Will People only expose contacts of said account, or is it Empathy’s responsibility to just dump the one it doesn’t need?

sorry if the question is stupid/unclear, I may not have read enough about People, but I can’t figure that out by myself.