On Fri, 2011-05-20 at 23:12 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le vendredi 20 mai 2011 à 10:37 -0400, Shaun McCance a écrit : > > I think Evandro's proposal is fair as well. We could set up a > > wiki page listing D-Bus interfaces we expect to be available. > > And not just for systemd-related things. Don't like PackageKit? > > Fine, whatever, but we expect you to make your stuff implement > > this interface. > > PackageKit is a good example of why this is not always a great idea. If > you design an interface based on a given system, you might make > assumptions that make it hard to adapt to other systems. > > I don’t think this approach is bad per se, but it requires extra care > while designing the interfaces, and checking how they would be ported to > other OSes, even without actually doing the job.
You don't mention specific problems. I assume you mean the issues with user interactions when installing: http://www.packagekit.org/pk-faq.html#user-interaction I don't believe this is a case of developers not having researched what different systems do. Rather, I think it's a case of making a conscious design decision about how we think users should interact with computers running GNOME. Understand that GNOME 3 is design-focused: We create a coherent design for users, then we figure out what technology we need to make that design happen. Some people seem to want to go the other direction: See what technology we have, and figure out what kind of design we can bolt on top of it. I think it is absolutely fair to ask GNOME developers to document what they expect of the system to achieve their designs. I do not think it's fair to ask them to compromise their designs because some technology stack behaves differently. -- Shaun _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
