On Monday 04 June 2012, Marko Saukko wrote: > On 04.06.2012 17:20, Marco Martin wrote: > > On Monday 04 June 2012, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > >> On Monday, June 4, 2012 11:49:41 Marco Martin wrote: > >>> yeah, seems that connman or networkmanager support is statically linked > >>> in the packagekit daemon and not a plugin, so doesn't seem possible to > >>> have both backends compled and installed at runtime :/ > >> > >> so here's the next obvious question: why is conman still in Mer? :) > >> > >> it really does not make much sense to have 2 backends mantained unless > >> there is a significant advantage unique to each one. right now, the only > >> advantage i know of is that conman is not actively developed? :) > > > > have a packagekit here that uses networkmanager: > > https://build.pub.meego.com/package/show?package=PackageKit&project=home% > > 3Amart%3Abranches%3AProject%3AKDE%3ADevel > > > > about connman i think is still alive as part of tizen, but not exactly > > developed in the open.. > > Yes, connman is still used in Tizen. Question: how much more open it > could be developed? > > Upstream webpage http://connman.net/ > Git tree: http://git.kernel.org/?p=network/connman/connman.git;a=summary > > Also there seems to be work done in Ubuntu as well. > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ConnMan
this is my bad i didn't knew about it :) (if there will be work done by at least two players, confidence in it raises a bit for sure) > > personally i think moving to networkmanager at mer level as well would be > > more future proof, i guess the resiztence at the moment is that the > > other ui projects have ui only for connman? > > What makes networkmanager more future proof? It has been developed much > longer, yes, and connman still lacks some of the features sure. But I > would say that it is getting there. Everything takes time when it is > started from scratch. > > What is the main thing why Plasma Active people do not want to use > connman? Is it because of lacking some crucial features at the moment? > Or because one has done code for network manager that one don't want to > throw away and redo for connman? Or something else? a combination of 3 things, familiarity, having something already done ui wise and not too much trust in Intel and dependency on tizen parts (i know is sad, but is a feeling of if it's happened once it can happen again) again, i really hope to be wrong on that and that there will be work on it by several players. Cheers, Marco Martin
