On jue, 2011-10-06 at 14:30 -0400, Ken VanDine wrote:
Sorry, not trying to sound harsh here but I couldn't find a better way
to say this.
Basically you are saying that GOA isn't really an open technology to
help consolidate user's online accounts, it is only to help consolidate
accounts
On 10/10/11 10:39, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On jue, 2011-10-06 at 14:30 -0400, Ken VanDine wrote:
Sorry, not trying to sound harsh here but I couldn't find a better way
to say this.
Basically you are saying that GOA isn't really an open technology to
help consolidate user's online accounts, it is
On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 12:36 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
On 10/10/11 10:39, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On jue, 2011-10-06 at 14:30 -0400, Ken VanDine wrote:
Sorry, not trying to sound harsh here but I couldn't find a better way
to say this.
Basically you are saying that GOA isn't really an
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Ted Gould t...@gould.cx wrote:
So to be clear, you see GOA's configurability to be in setting up new
account groups, but new protocols. So I could add Corp. Account but
if my corp. uses a protocol that GNOME OS doesn't use otherwise, I
couldn't add this.
We discussed this with twitter, and they agreed that including the API
key in the packaging instead of in the upstream source was good enough
separation for them. So for example, in the Ubuntu package we include
the Ubuntu API key for twitter. And we recommend all distros to do
the same.
Hey,
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Ken VanDine kvand...@gnome.org wrote:
We discussed this with twitter, and they agreed that including the API
key in the packaging instead of in the upstream source was good enough
separation for them. So for example, in the Ubuntu package we include
the
On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 11:10 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
Either way, I don't get why you are so concerned about whether GOA can
be extended. If you buy into the idea that apps will always need to
have a separate panel for non-mainstream accounts then... then the app
can provide the extension
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 10:21 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
And we don't want to add switches for services that are not covered by
GNOME apps.
Could you elaborate on the term GNOME apps in this context please?
For instance, if Inkscape wanted to have account settings for the
recently published
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 10:49 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
If you examine the GOA project and its git log,
You can rest assured that I haven't read the git log, I did look at the
last release though :-)
combined with the idea of supporting generic IMAP/SMTP/XMPP/Caldav
configurations, see
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 14:49 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Ken VanDine kvand...@gnome.org wrote:
Sorry, not trying to sound harsh here but I couldn't find a better way
to say this.
Basically you are saying that GOA isn't really an open technology to
help
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 9:05 AM, Ted Gould t...@gould.cx wrote:
IMHO, the problem with GOA is its lack of extensibility. So adding
something like a corporate account type is difficult if not impossible.
For instance, if was foo corp, and we had internal mail, jabber and
status.net services
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 9:05 AM, Ted Gould t...@gould.cx wrote:
IMHO, the problem with GOA is its lack of extensibility. So adding
something like a corporate account type is difficult if not impossible.
For instance, if was foo corp, and we had internal mail, jabber and
status.net
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 10:21 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
But GOA is not a 'generic account setup' dialog to allow all the
worlds apps to drop their own account setup dialogs. If that is what
you are looking for, you will be disappointed. It is the central place
to set up accounts that are
Are there plans for making service providers in GOA pluggable?
Here is my use case:
I really want to get rid of gwibber-accounts for configuring accounts in
Gwibber. It makes sense to use GOA for this, however gwibber supports
quite a few social networks as well as supporting third party
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Ken VanDine kvand...@gnome.org wrote:
I really want to get rid of gwibber-accounts for configuring accounts in
Gwibber. It makes sense to use GOA for this,
I don't think it necessarily does, no. See below.
however gwibber supports
quite a few social
On 10/06/2011 07:40 PM, David Zeuthen wrote:
II. To avoid user confusion we only want the major online services in GOA.
Support for more specialized protocols/services should happen in each
separate app - that's why, for example, that Empathy still has a
preferences
menu so you
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Steve Frécinaux nudr...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/06/2011 07:40 PM, David Zeuthen wrote:
II. To avoid user confusion we only want the major online services in GOA.
Support for more specialized protocols/services should happen in each
separate app -
Sorry, not trying to sound harsh here but I couldn't find a better way
to say this.
Basically you are saying that GOA isn't really an open technology to
help consolidate user's online accounts, it is only to help consolidate
accounts for blessed GNOME apps? This doesn't really help users in
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Ken VanDine kvand...@gnome.org wrote:
Sorry, not trying to sound harsh here but I couldn't find a better way
to say this.
Basically you are saying that GOA isn't really an open technology to
help consolidate user's online accounts, it is only to help
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:40 PM, David Zeuthen zeut...@gmail.com wrote:
I. Adding support for a provider P, currently means making code-changes to
all of the GNOME apps using its services.. because most of the time
standard
standardized protocols are not in use. For the few cases where
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Patryk Zawadzki pat...@pld-linux.org wrote:
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:40 PM, David Zeuthen zeut...@gmail.com wrote:
I. Adding support for a provider P, currently means making code-changes to
all of the GNOME apps using its services.. because most of the
21 matches
Mail list logo
