On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 1:56 AM, David Edmundson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:26 AM, Harald Sitter <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Hi David, >> >> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 1:06 AM, David Edmundson >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > There's so much I intend to get done with it, but I've been really busy >> > trying to get KDE Telepathy out. It's all already consuming far more >> > time >> > than I really should let it. >> > Anyway. What's the current state and what needs to be done: >> > Robert Ancell (the main LightDM guy) has ,been refactoring the backend, >> > which >> > has led to some changes in the Qt lib which I'm not 100% happy with. >> > Instead >> > of just jumping on dbus, we now have a lot of GTK lib copying+pasting >> > with a >> > thin Qt wrapper in the main class of the greeter. At a minimum I want >> > this >> > moved out to a separate private class to give a very clean maintainable >> > header to the publicly exposed main lib. Ideally we'd want someone like >> > George Kiagiadis involved who is extremely pro at auto-building Qt >> > bindings >> > for GTK and get a library that isn't going to fall apart as soon as the >> > GTK >> > version updates. >> >> Selling a GTK+ dependency to people will be *very* difficult, so I >> think DBus is the better choice really. > > > My bad, I worded that very badly. It's copied and pasted native C code, that > is then either bound to GTK in the GTK lib, or Qt in ours. There's no > lib-dependency. > The point is that it's copied and pasted code. That's never a long term good > sign. We don't want the two going out of sync.
Oh, yeah, that is absolutely good. > It does seem like the LightDM backend suddenly lost it's DBus interface and > I'm not sure why. This is not so good :S >> There were no particular decision set in stone about using Plasma. >> Just seemed like an obvious choice. I must say having a QML greeter is >> certainly intriguing too, especially since I understand Canonical >> wants to invest in a Qt greeter anyway, so we could share resources >> there. >> > > What I would like to see is a list of things we want to do with the greeter > - and then we can discuss the best solutions for doing it. I'm talking to > Alex Fiestas on IRC, I'm not /that/ against plasma, I just want to the right > solution chosen properly, not because it's the latest buzzword. Sane technical decisions FTW. requirements that come to mind: * must be able to support finger print auth stuff * must be able to support face detection auth stuff Both from a GUI POV of course. >> BTW, you can listen to the session at [1] >> >> [1] >> http://mirrors.tumbleweed.org.za/uds-o/2011-05-13-12-55-desktop-o-kubuntu-lightdm.ogg > > Will do, Thanks. > Can I propose that: > - We all get our thinking caps on, come up with ideas for "our ideal login > manager" (including the KCM) > - We get some idea from Robert (and anyone else on the main LightDM side) > as to what upcoming changes in the backend we can expect. > - I'll tidy up the library code, and make it both QML and Plamsa ready > (pretty much the same thing, more models, more property macros etc.) > - From here we have an IRC meeting to discuss the plan. - Discuss stuff upstream and with other distros Sounds like a plan! regards, Harald -- kubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
