Hi David, In talking with some people, they still think name like org.freedesktop.UDisks is a little project specific and might cause some misunderstandings. If someone wants to implement a different daemon but still keep the interfaces compatible with upower/udisks, then name like UDisks/UPower is a little bit confusing for users. In this case, name like Disks/Power will be more clear. This is just my 2 cents.
Regards, Jedy On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 11:17 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote: > On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 09:09 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote: > > udisks already uses org.freedesktop.UDisks, and I expect upower will > > change similarly. > > Right - and I think udisks, it being the project name is pretty OS > neutral so I don't see any problem in using it in public interfaces. I > also don't think we have any Linux specific bits in the interfaces. > > Note that method names such as LinuxMdStop() isn't really related to > "Linux, the kernel" or "Linux, the OS" - instead it's related to the > on-disk format of (Linux) MD software raid and associated tools (e.g. > mdadm(8)) and drivers (e.g. md(4)). Ditto for things like LuksLock() > referring to LUKS (Linux Unified Key Setup). > > Presumably non-Linux OSes (or non-Linux kernels) could implement both > Linux MD-RAID and LUKS - if not, implementations can just return the > NotSupported error. > > FWIW, we can always add similar interfaces for e.g. FreeBSD geom or > ZFS > or whatever - FWIW, I'm planning to add interfaces for better btrfs > integration - might look similar to what ZFS will need. > > Thanks, > David > > _______________________________________________ devkit-devel mailing list devkit-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/devkit-devel
