> As you can see, there was mentioned that KDE folks did not want to have
> cross-desktop daemon - I thought that powersave could become one.
I also thought powersave could become a cross-desktop discussion, but the
answers of Richard Hughes and some other ppl on the list looks for me as if a
useful targeted discussion is not possible. They want to do their stuff and
have no real interest in a common cross-desktop daemon and a open discussion.
But this is _my_ impression, maybe I'm wrong
You are probably right. :-(
> As I am pushing powersave/kpowersave into (K)ubuntu, I would for sure like
> to see more cooperation between two power management systems.
I would like also see more cooperation, but after this thread and the reaction
of the gnome guys (including the g-p-m maintainer) I'm pessimistic also if
there are ppl which whish e.g. a seperate daemon (see e.g. mail from Davyd
Madeley).
If we would like to find a way to get a common cross-desktop daemon (or at
least a common well defined DBUS-powermanagement interface), we need more
people reporting this whish and discuss this topic.
I have seen Ubuntu-server people also being interested in power management in Dapper+1, which might be interesting - I do not see this can be done properly without full blown daeon like powersave.
At that point the minimalistic design on g-p-m may not be enough for the server (potentially w/o desktop environment).
Regards,
Luka
_______________________________________________ powersave-devel mailing list [email protected] http://forge.novell.com/mailman/listinfo/powersave-devel
