Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 22:23:47 -0500
From: Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>
To: notmuch <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Introduce a generic tree-like abstraction for MIME
	traversal.
Message-ID: <20111228032347.GA30150@mit.edu>
References: <1323027100-10307-1-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>
	<1323460468-4030-1-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>
	<1323460468-4030-3-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>
	<87k46572f7.fsf@gmail.com> <20111224034500.GA1927@mit.edu>
	<4EF9D5E8.4050203@fifthhorseman.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4EF9D5E8.4050203@fifthhorseman.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: list

Quoth Daniel Kahn Gillmor on Dec 27 at  9:27 am:
> On 12/23/2011 10:45 PM, Austin Clements wrote:
> > Quoth Dmitry Kurochkin on Dec 10 at  3:25 am:
> >> +           /* For some reason the GMimeSignatureValidity returned
> >> +            * here is not a const (inconsistent with that
> >> +            * returned by
> >> +            * g_mime_multipart_encrypted_get_signature_validity,
> >> +            * and therefore needs to be properly disposed of.
> >> +            * Hopefully the API will become more consistent. */
> >>
> >> Ouch.  In gmime 2.6 this API has changed, but looks like the
> >> issue is still there.  Is there a bug for it?  If yes, we should
> >> add a reference to the comment.  Otherwise, we should file the
> >> bug and then add a reference to the comment :)
> > 
> > It looks like they're both non-const in 2.6 (which makes more sense to
> > me).  I updated the comment to mention this.
> 
> Here's the bug report where this was discussed with upstream, fwiw:
> 
>   https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=640911

Oh, are we not supposed to be disposing of the GMimeSignatureValidity
returned by g_mime_multipart_encrypted_get_signature_validity
ourselves?  Comment 1 on that bug report suggests that we shouldn't.
The old show code did, so I ported that behavior over to the new code.