On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 23:26 +0000, Bastien Nocera wrote: > On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 17:20 -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 20:35 -0600, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: > > > El mar, 16-01-2007 a las 11:05 +0000, Bastien Nocera escribió:
> I was ready to say: "most definitely", but that probably wouldn't be > problem, as it's CPU time that's being counted, not wall-clock 5 > seconds. Point. As long as the timeout is adequate for slow CPUs, it's fine with me, then. > I'll reiterate that it should be the thumbnailers that commit suicide > when they take too much time, not libgnomeui killing them (that's unless > Federico shows me that it's possible to thumbnail the biggest/hardest > videos under that time, and where the bottlenecks would be). The problem with leaving it up to thumbnailers/metadata extractors themselves, is that: - You have a lot more potential points of failure. - You'll run code that's not part of the GNOME platform. - It's hard to do QA because there are so many possible inputs. - When it breaks, users will file bugs against Nautilus/Beagle/etc, not against the metadata extractor, and bug reports are often useless even if you know which component is failing. This has bitten Beagle's metadata extraction a *lot* - and it's not just 100% CPU bugs, it's also bugs that'll eat up all your memory, for instance. -- Hans Petter _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
