[OTR-dev] Re: [Gaim-devel] gaim-OTR, AIM DirectIM, and messaging signals

[Evan Schoenberg]

On Feb 23, 2006, at 10:33 PM, Etan Reisner wrote:

> I only partly understand the issue here, and I have next to know  
> undertanding of the underlying encryption stuff, but couldn't a  
> prpl that needs to do this processing just use the same signals  
> that the encryption plugins use? And use the signal priority stuff  
> to ensure that they come first, to facilitate this we can change  
> the handful of GAIM_PRIORITY defines to be an enum with default  
> levels for PRPL/ENCRYPTION/etc. Would that not solve at least some  
> of the problems? Or is there something I'm missing? Does the prpl  
> processing do funny things to the message that the plugins would  
> have to know about to deal with or something? Would the prpls need  
> to keep track of messages between the signal and the normal  
> mechanism somehow? (Would we need to start tagging messages with  
> per-conversation ids to make this work more easily?)
>
> 	-Etan

So long as the message signal allows access to the GaimConversation  
for the message (which it does IIRC), nothing needs to be added --  
and I think this would work nicely, indeed, with the added bonus of  
minimal new code needing to be written.

I just noticed that the 'sub away formatters' in AIM -- %n for name, % 
d for date, etc. -- are also broken in OTR chats for the same reason;  
gaim_str_sub_away_formatters() should be done in such a signal  
handler even outside of directIMs.

-Evan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/pipermail/otr-dev/attachments/20060225/a9f18561/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://lists.cypherpunks.ca/pipermail/otr-dev/attachments/20060225/a9f18561/attachment.pgp>