[Kde-pim] Review Request 109208: Work harder to ensure we have a trash folder

[Wolfgang Rohdewald]

> On Feb. 28, 2013, 3:54 p.m., Kevin Krammer wrote:
> > I am not sure this is fixing the problem at the right location. The question is why does SpecialCollections::hasDefaultCollection()return true if there is no valid collection for the queried type
> 
> Wolfgang Rohdewald wrote:
>     it has an invalid default collection (negative id, no remoteId), and the function is not "hasValidDefaultCollection". But I looked closer and the patch is now simpler. SpecialCollections::defaultCollection() always returns a collection - if there is none, it returns an invalid collection (with id -1). And all collections with negative id return false for isValid().
> 
> Kevin Krammer wrote:
>     Well, an invalid collection is not something one would consider as a collection if you explicitly call a check function.
>     Or at least I don't see any use case of first checking if there is a collection and then not getting one.
> 
> Wolfgang Rohdewald wrote:
>     invalid collection != no collection
>     
>     I do not know enough about akonadi internals but I believe those invalid collections are sort of placeholders until the database actually gives out a unique id. Have a look at the Collection constructor - passing out negative ids (meaning invalid collection) seems to be a normal use case. Changing hasDefaultCollection() (and hasCollection() to be consistent) to return only true for a valid collection is something I would not want to do - there may be places depending on current behaviour. And the API doc does not say that only valid collections should be found.
>     
>     Collection::Collection() :
>         Entity( new CollectionPrivate )
>     {
>       Q_D( Collection );
>       static int lastId = -1;
>       d->mId = lastId--;
>     }
>     
>     grepping for 'Collection()' finds a lot of places where such invalid collections are generated.
> 
> Kevin Krammer wrote:
>     A collection instance without valid id is just a locally created object of class Akonadi::Collection, it is not a handle to an actual collection yet.
>     
>     Getting such a default constructed object after checking for availability is like getting a default constructed value from a hash after checking with contains.
>     
>     In the same sense calling "hasDefaultCollection" and the not getting any is definitely not a good behavior. A hasDefaultCollection() that does not actually check anything is useless
> 
> Wolfgang Rohdewald wrote:
>     If you want to, I can change hasCollection() (which is called by hasDefaultCollection) to only return true for a valid collection.
>     
>     Looking at the source, I a very unsure if such a change of behaviour might not cause surprises.
>     
>     So IMHO this would not be a bug fix anymore, and I would not dare to apply it to KDE/4.10, only to master.
>     
>     So maybe my proposal for 4.10 and your proposal for master?
> 
> Kevin Krammer wrote:
>     I looked into this a bit more. hasCollection() just checks if there is a collection for the given resource/type combination. So if it current returns true, it means that the underlying data structure, mFoldersForResource, got corrupted somehow, i.e. it should never contain an invalid collection.
>     
>     My guess is that this happens in SpecialCollectionsPrivate::collectionFetchJobFinished(), where the code uses the collection name instead of the special collection type (which is used everywhere else) to identify the entry in the resource's sub hash.
>     But that would need to be verified.
>     
>     Assuming you have some way of testing this problem, can you check where the invalid entry comes from?

I put kDebug() in there

This code is e.g. called if I copy/modify files in the maildir folder

but it is never called while starting kmail. The problem must be somewhere
else.


- Wolfgang


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109208/#review28269
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Feb. 28, 2013, 4:45 p.m., Wolfgang Rohdewald wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109208/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 28, 2013, 4:45 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDEPIM.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> collection.isValid() is not enough, collection might have a negative id and no remoteId
> 
> 
> This addresses bugs 285532, 303117 and 307016.
>     http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=285532
>     http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=303117
>     http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=307016
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   akonadi/specialcollectionsrequestjob.cpp 29db72f0e3bc60b0f8b9c9434151176bea44b14f 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109208/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> removed all .local/share/akonadi* and restarted kmail. Without patch, no trash. With patch, trash is generated.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Wolfgang Rohdewald
> 
>

_______________________________________________
KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim at kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/