Le mardi 25 septembre 2007, à 12:41 -0700, Alex Graveley a écrit : > The file selector and file manager seem like the most pathological > users of an IO API. Do we want to expose another largish API because > of their requirements? That was what led to gnome-vfs in the first > place. > > ISVs typically don't use gnome-vfs because it doesn't work x-desktop, > and I don't see that changing by pushing it lower in the stack. Maybe > removing the added dependency burden will make it more accessible, I > dunno. > > Most apps that I use every day (firefox, thunderbird, OOo, emacs) are > unlikely to switch to gio for anything other than opening files via > the open dialog. So it's not like pushing gnome-vfs lower is going to > suddenly make URLs/paths work the same across the desktop. > > Are there any stats on gnome-vfs usage? Who uses what? Several of > the things you mention (content types, icons, app info) are wrappers > for xdg specs and tools. I could see that growing to include volume > and file monitoring (one can hope). > > Would growing xdg APIs be more sustainable than exposing libgio as > part of glib? Or do you think the uphill battle with xdg is not worth > it?
Any reason libgio would not be suitable as a cross-desktop library? I mean, if the solution is to develop a new xdg library which, in the end, does exactly what gio does, I don't see why gio shouldn't be first considered as a good candidate for this library... Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
