Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On 28/01/12 12:54, Colin Walters wrote: Anyways I don't think we're in violent disagreement here, and what I want to focus on is concrete actions. Vincent, Michael, Milan, as the people who actually contributed code here - are you guys OK with the DBus backend work and/or future plans to use systemd? Sure, it's fine. It means extra work for Ubuntu next cycle, but as has already been discussed, we have time to plan for it. -mt ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Hi, Le samedi 28 janvier 2012, à 12:54 -0500, Colin Walters a écrit : On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 17:34 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: I don't think Vincent was surprised, or he really shouldn't have been: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654970#c2 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654970#c3 For reference, I'm not surprised it went away; I'm surprised it went away now, without any announcement. [...] Anyways I don't think we're in violent disagreement here, and what I want to focus on is concrete actions. Vincent, Michael, Milan, as the people who actually contributed code here - are you guys OK with the DBus backend work and/or future plans to use systemd? I've already mentioned earlier I'm fine with plans to use systemd, my main worry being a smooth transition. For reference, one issue people might have with this change, even for people extracting the code of timedated from systemd, is that querying the state of ntp and enabling/disabling ntp requires systemd -- since it's all done via dbus methods of the systemd service. Now, I do believe that's actually a good thing since it means there's no need for custom code for each distro. And I'm fine with it for openSUSE: that's something I'm ready to lose for users not booting with systemd (even better if g-c-c doesn't show the ntp toggle when this happens). Cheers, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Em Fri, 2012-01-27 às 09:45 -0500, Colin Walters escreveu: On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: hi Bastien, On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08 Author: Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 + datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. I think systemd is awesome; however, I think you (and others) are being a bit too cavalier about deleting code. While it's almost certainly true (looking at the git log) that you are one of the dominant recent contributors to gnome-settings-daemon, there are other people involved in GNOME who for one reason or another aren't going to use systemd, and it's a bit disrespectful to just delete the code. From their perspective, it is a regression - before, they could change the time. After, they can't. And in the picture, we need to clamp down on these kinds of regressions. That doesn't mean we can't ever take a step backwards - for sufficiently large steps forward. But in this case we're just shuffling around where the code for setting time lives. So concretely - how about bringing back the old code and making it conditionally compile under a --enable-date-time-backend flag? If you want, I can do a patch. I've already explained how to make this work for the 3 distributions affected[1]. Ubuntu has apparently taken steps to fix the problem, Debian can probably use the same code, and OpenSUSE can use the RPM I made and linked to earlier in the thread as a basis to fixing the problem. You call me disrespectful and qualify my attitude as cavalier. It's anything but. There are many ways to solve this problem, and plenty that don't involve e-mails to me or reverting commits I made. I'd like those to be contemplated. And your patch doesn't work, as the timedated and old gsd mechanism's API aren't the same. [1]: I'll repeat once again that Ubuntu, Debian, SUSE and Fedora were the only supported distros in the old mechanism. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Em Sat, 2012-01-28 às 18:21 +0200, Ionut Biru escreveu: On 01/28/2012 05:31 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: snip [1]: I'll repeat once again that Ubuntu, Debian, SUSE and Fedora were the only supported distros in the old mechanism. I keep seeing this. Add to the list Arch Linux as well. No, it wasn't: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-settings-daemon/tree/plugins/datetime?id=0912d3235db73a1e206dc2084fa3abccea6f8114 It couldn't read the status of the NTP usage, and it just happened to work for setting the date and time. Nobody provided Arch Linux support upstream. The timedated mechanism will work just as well on Arch Linux as the old gsd used to. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On 01/28/2012 06:36 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: Em Sat, 2012-01-28 às 18:21 +0200, Ionut Biru escreveu: On 01/28/2012 05:31 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: snip [1]: I'll repeat once again that Ubuntu, Debian, SUSE and Fedora were the only supported distros in the old mechanism. I keep seeing this. Add to the list Arch Linux as well. No, it wasn't: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-settings-daemon/tree/plugins/datetime?id=0912d3235db73a1e206dc2084fa3abccea6f8114 It couldn't read the status of the NTP usage, and it just happened to work for setting the date and time. Nobody provided Arch Linux support upstream. The timedated mechanism will work just as well on Arch Linux as the old gsd used to. in the commit you reverted search for rc.conf and Arch Linux. The timezone and all the other stuff are saved there. -- Ionuț ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Em Sat, 2012-01-28 às 18:39 +0200, Ionut Biru escreveu: On 01/28/2012 06:36 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: Em Sat, 2012-01-28 às 18:21 +0200, Ionut Biru escreveu: On 01/28/2012 05:31 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: snip [1]: I'll repeat once again that Ubuntu, Debian, SUSE and Fedora were the only supported distros in the old mechanism. I keep seeing this. Add to the list Arch Linux as well. No, it wasn't: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-settings-daemon/tree/plugins/datetime?id=0912d3235db73a1e206dc2084fa3abccea6f8114 It couldn't read the status of the NTP usage, and it just happened to work for setting the date and time. Nobody provided Arch Linux support upstream. The timedated mechanism will work just as well on Arch Linux as the old gsd used to. in the commit you reverted search for rc.conf and Arch Linux. The timezone and all the other stuff are saved there. Ha, it saves the timezone. It doesn't give out correct values for NTP though. That's still incomplete and doesn't change my original stance (that only 4 distributions were fully supported). ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 15:31 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: Ubuntu has apparently taken steps to fix the problem, Debian can probably use the same code, and OpenSUSE can use the RPM I made and linked to earlier in the thread as a basis to fixing the problem. You call me disrespectful and qualify my attitude as cavalier. It's anything but. There are many ways to solve this problem, and plenty that don't involve e-mails to me or reverting commits I made. I'd like those to be contemplated. It is about email - just doing git log plugins/datetime/ one can see the people who had contributed to that code, and as far as I can see, they were not all notified that it was just going to be deleted. Not all of these people watch bugzilla for g-s-d consistently. For example both Michael Terry and Vincent Untz had contributed to the code, but they seemed surprised. And they contribute to GNOME, and for them it's a regression. That's the point here - we need to minimize regressions. No one wants to be part of a project where other people come along and either unintentionally or intentionally remove/break code that you wrote that worked. And this is just shuffling around where the date/time code lives. It's hard to describe it as a new, compelling addition to Free Software. Anyways I don't want to drag this out more than it already is - if the affected people are OK implementing a DBus service, then that works. But if they feel e.g. that it's easier for them to keep the mechanism code around and have control-center talk to it, we should at least consider that perspective, because that code worked before, and could continue working. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Em Sat, 2012-01-28 às 11:52 -0500, Colin Walters escreveu: On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 15:31 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: Ubuntu has apparently taken steps to fix the problem, Debian can probably use the same code, and OpenSUSE can use the RPM I made and linked to earlier in the thread as a basis to fixing the problem. You call me disrespectful and qualify my attitude as cavalier. It's anything but. There are many ways to solve this problem, and plenty that don't involve e-mails to me or reverting commits I made. I'd like those to be contemplated. It is about email - just doing git log plugins/datetime/ one can see the people who had contributed to that code, and as far as I can see, they were not all notified that it was just going to be deleted. Not all of these people watch bugzilla for g-s-d consistently. For example both Michael Terry and Vincent Untz had contributed to the code, but they seemed surprised. And they contribute to GNOME, and for them it's a regression. I don't think Vincent was surprised, or he really shouldn't have been: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654970#c2 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654970#c3 Michael didn't comment on this issue in this thread. Sebastien is CC:ed on gnome-settings-daemon bugs. That's the point here - we need to minimize regressions. No one wants to be part of a project where other people come along and either unintentionally or intentionally remove/break code that you wrote that worked. And this is just shuffling around where the date/time code lives. It's hard to describe it as a new, compelling addition to Free Software. It's also about removing 3k lines of code that lived in the wrong place in the stack for all these years (it was in gnome-panel before). And about fixing the date time panel to stop using synchronous APIs. Anyways I don't want to drag this out more than it already is - if the affected people are OK implementing a DBus service, then that works. But if they feel e.g. that it's easier for them to keep the mechanism code around and have control-center talk to it, we should at least consider that perspective, because that code worked before, and could continue working. It worked for 4 distros. It can work for those 4 again with little work. /Bastien, looking forward to removing support for fallback mode ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 17:34 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: I don't think Vincent was surprised, or he really shouldn't have been: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654970#c2 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654970#c3 Michael didn't comment on this issue in this thread. Sebastien is CC:ed on gnome-settings-daemon bugs. Okay, well let's just say as a general rule - before deleting code like this, run git log and add the affected people to CC? That's how it works in Linux kernel land. It's also about removing 3k lines of code that lived in the wrong place in the stack for all these years (it was in gnome-panel before). And about fixing the date time panel to stop using synchronous APIs. Yeah, I don't mean to belittle the work, and like I said before, in the big picture I think it's great. I am obviously one of the bigger proponents of deeper GNOME+Linux integration, because ultimately I think that's the only way to create an experience that doesn't totally suck because it's filled with crappy abstraction layers and unintegrated parts. But we should try as hard as possible to get from here to there while *not* regressing things for other people, because GNOME is a shared pool. Anyways I don't think we're in violent disagreement here, and what I want to focus on is concrete actions. Vincent, Michael, Milan, as the people who actually contributed code here - are you guys OK with the DBus backend work and/or future plans to use systemd? ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Le samedi 28 janvier 2012 à 12:54 -0500, Colin Walters a écrit : Anyways I don't think we're in violent disagreement here, and what I want to focus on is concrete actions. Vincent, Michael, Milan, as the people who actually contributed code here - are you guys OK with the DBus backend work and/or future plans to use systemd? (My contribution was only a few lines to add Debian support, and my position doesn't reflect anything about Debian/Ubuntu since I don't contribute to these projects directly.) FWIW, I totally agree with your stance on this issue. The move towards systemd or D-Bus interfaces for distributions that don't use it is a great goal, but I think we'll all benefit from announcing better the changes in requirements. We can only count on distributor's responsibility to implement these interfaces if they are aware of this need early enough in the cycle. So now it's too late to do that, I'd say it's up to the distributors to tell us whether they think it's possible to package the systemd tools in time for 3.4. My two cents ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 15:47 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: requirements and they sometimes change. We should work together and reach out though to affected parties... and IMO well known that I/release team could improve on that. Fortunately 3.4 is not out yet. In the interest of better communications: What are the actions GNOME is going to do for distributors? To summarize the thread: 1) maintain portability matrix, external dependencies 1) Shaun mentions re-implementing - http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointNinetyone/ExternalDependencies 2) Olav mentions - https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix From the discussions distributors wanted one release in advance for the external dependencies to be updated. You'll have to figure out how to work that with module owners on that one. But I assume the release team can help here. Yes, I understand that there was instances where people did know the changes organically with evidence. I think what distributors want is formulism despite whether knowledge is there or not. If we can release software every 6 months we should able to give formal requirements 6 months prior to the release. What are the expectations of GNOME for distributors? Read the portability matrix and if we have ExternalDependencies then we should do that. Anything else? As a marketing guy, I want to see a common experience on all distributions (branding aside). Let's not lose sight of the fact that we want to see our software on as many distributions as possible and it should be easy to integrate GNOME with any particular distro. Maintaining good relationships with our distributors is essential for that. sri ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: hi Bastien, On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08 Author: Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 + datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. I think systemd is awesome; however, I think you (and others) are being a bit too cavalier about deleting code. While it's almost certainly true (looking at the git log) that you are one of the dominant recent contributors to gnome-settings-daemon, there are other people involved in GNOME who for one reason or another aren't going to use systemd, and it's a bit disrespectful to just delete the code. From their perspective, it is a regression - before, they could change the time. After, they can't. And in the picture, we need to clamp down on these kinds of regressions. That doesn't mean we can't ever take a step backwards - for sufficiently large steps forward. But in this case we're just shuffling around where the code for setting time lives. So concretely - how about bringing back the old code and making it conditionally compile under a --enable-date-time-backend flag? If you want, I can do a patch. -Colin, with his GNOME release team hat on ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 09:45 -0500, Colin Walters wrote: So concretely - how about bringing back the old code and making it conditionally compile under a --enable-date-time-backend flag? If you want, I can do a patch. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=668851 ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Le 20/01/2012 23:08, Lennart Poettering a écrit : You know, your complaining would be a bit more believable if Google wouldn't find this for us: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit So, the problem set has been known for a while, a number of Canonical desktop team members have been subscribed to that page, the documentation for the interfaces is all available, some code has already been written by Canonical. So I really don't see what went wrong here, except maybe that Canonical's internal communication didn't work out so well? Hi, Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubuntu issue? I've replied previously that it's not an issue for us and I will tell it again: the change is not really a surprise and not an issue for Ubuntu since we are staying on GNOME 3.2 this cycle and we will have solutions in place before we upgrade next cycle. That said I wrote the emails on that list as a GNOME contributor (would it help to not focus on Ubuntu if I was written using my debian email rather than the Ubuntu one?) because I think GNOME as a project could do better. This example might also not be problematic but who knows about other changes that will happen in the next years, it would still help if GNOME was settling on an improved communication for the platform requirements. Cheers, Sebastien Bacher ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:14:32AM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote: Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubuntu issue? Only that distribution is affected by the functionality change right (relying on API that atm is only provided by systemd)? All the other distributions have systemd, so they didn't need to be made aware (though we should've). Am I missing something? I guess Debian? Didn't see anyone raise that up to now. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
2012/1/23 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl: On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:14:32AM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote: Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubuntu issue? Only that distribution is affected by the functionality change right (relying on API that atm is only provided by systemd)? All the other distributions have systemd, so they didn't need to be made aware (though we should've). Am I missing something? I guess Debian? Didn't see anyone raise that up to now. Or maybe people aren't very happy of the tone of the discussion and don't want to be dragged into it (and that is why I didn't reply when openSUSE was mentioned). This change is also problematic for people who might not be using the last version of their distribution or who have issue with systemd which aren't fixed yet and are forced to use sysvinit. -- Frederic Crozat ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On vie, 2012-01-20 at 22:56 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 20.01.12 08:47, Ryan Lortie (de...@desrt.ca) wrote: hi Bastien, On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have to provide a compatible D-Bus service. This is what I guessed you'd say. It can be something extracted from systemd, or something new and revived from the old date and time mechanism, but it won't be something we support and maintain in gnome-settings-daemon. And I'm glad I have 3000 less lines code to maintain. I'm just a little bit concerned about how this looks. I love when we can delete code, but we're doing it by disabling a previously-working feature for a portion of our users. If we introduced new optional features that depended on a particular systemd functionality in order to operate, it would be one thing. We do that often. This change is a regression of existing functionality in the name of I don't feel like maintaining it anymore. I'd also feel a bit better if I thought you had made efforts to get in touch with those that would be affected by this regression. Ubuntu isn't shipping GNOME 3.4 g-s-d/g-c-c, this cycle, for example, but for the last week I've been trying to convince them that they should. If I had succeeded (which I am now glad I didn't) then this change would have been a royal pain, creating a whole lot of new work to fit into an already full schedule. Many of our own end-users will still want to install GNOME 3.4 onto their Ubuntu systems (myself included). I look forward to the mention in our release notes about how they can no longer change their time because we wanted to delete a bit of code. Note that The Ubuntu folks have been well aware of all of this coming. How I know that? Because at their last UDS they scheduled a session about rewriting those mechanisms for Ubuntu, and they even have a project page up on launchpad: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit as I already said, this is all implemented, except for the datetime interface, which wasn't used in GNOME when I implemented the other systemd services. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Mon, 2012-01-23 at 10:54 +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote: 2012/1/23 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl: On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:14:32AM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote: Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubuntu issue? Only that distribution is affected by the functionality change right (relying on API that atm is only provided by systemd)? All the other distributions have systemd, so they didn't need to be made aware (though we should've). Am I missing something? I guess Debian? Didn't see anyone raise that up to now. Or maybe people aren't very happy of the tone of the discussion and don't want to be dragged into it (and that is why I didn't reply when openSUSE was mentioned). This change is also problematic for people who might not be using the last version of their distribution or who have issue with systemd which aren't fixed yet and are forced to use sysvinit. Requires: systemd-services And have a Provides: systemd-services in the systemd RPM. The problem isn't exactly insurmontable. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:54:30AM +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote: 2012/1/23 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl: On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:14:32AM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote: Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubuntu issue? Only that distribution is affected by the functionality change right (relying on API that atm is only provided by systemd)? All the other distributions have systemd, so they didn't need to be made aware (though we should've). Am I missing something? I guess Debian? Didn't see anyone raise that up to now. Or maybe people aren't very happy of the tone of the discussion and don't want to be dragged into it (and that is why I didn't reply when openSUSE was mentioned). Just let me know privately. I was focussing on improving release-team bits and I don't like to think (or speak) about tone if I have participated in the discussion. Not good to hear though, I need to understand the openSUSE viewpoint as well. This change is also problematic for people who might not be using the last version of their distribution or who have issue with systemd which aren't fixed yet and are forced to use sysvinit. Mageia 2 will have an optional sysvinit (default is systemd). I don't really see the problem for Mageia. In case of sysvinit, some minor stuff might not work or might not work (perhaps daemons would still work under sysvinit, don't care). For me, if you choose the fallback, don't expect things to work perfectly. Is this the openSUSE viewpoint? -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Bastien Nocera wrote: And have a Provides: systemd-services in the systemd RPM. The problem isn't exactly insurmontable. Of course it's not insurmontable, but this thread came to be more about proper communication than technical solutions. So far we had 1) the update of the portability matrix, and 2) the acknowledgment a mail should have been sent to distributor-list@; I believe this is satisfactory. Ideally we'd also have earlier notifications, and a list of D-Bus API we depend on (like we had the external dependencies page), but that's more work, and not always feasible. Fred ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Hi, Le lundi 23 janvier 2012, à 13:02 +0100, Olav Vitters a écrit : On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:54:30AM +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote: 2012/1/23 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl: On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:14:32AM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote: Why do you guys insist in making that a Canonical,Ubuntu issue? Only that distribution is affected by the functionality change right (relying on API that atm is only provided by systemd)? All the other distributions have systemd, so they didn't need to be made aware (though we should've). Am I missing something? I guess Debian? Didn't see anyone raise that up to now. Or maybe people aren't very happy of the tone of the discussion and don't want to be dragged into it (and that is why I didn't reply when openSUSE was mentioned). For reference, I feel the same. I originally wanted to reply to the thread, but got distracted. When I came back to it, it was full of negative comments, bad feelings, etc. And I'm tired of the bad atmosphere on d-d-l. FWIW, here's what I wanted to say at first: in openSUSE, we're not affected as downstream, but as this mechanism could be considered as a public API, I'd have preferred to learn about the change a bit earlier to check it's all fine for us (and yes, I understand it's not always possible). With my upstream hat: I think we could keep this for one cycle and mention somewhere in NEWS that it's deprecated and will disappear in the next cycle. It doesn't cost us much to do that, and it's nice to our downstreams. [...] This change is also problematic for people who might not be using the last version of their distribution or who have issue with systemd which aren't fixed yet and are forced to use sysvinit. Mageia 2 will have an optional sysvinit (default is systemd). I don't really see the problem for Mageia. In case of sysvinit, some minor stuff might not work or might not work (perhaps daemons would still work under sysvinit, don't care). For me, if you choose the fallback, don't expect things to work perfectly. Is this the openSUSE viewpoint? This is similar to what we're doing for openSUSE. Still, I think it's better to nicely handle the case where systemd is not what is being used. It enables a smoother migration. Another systemd-related change was already mentioned earlier: the new --enable-systemd configure flag that removes ConsoleKit support when it's used. It cannot really be used for openSUSE (and Mageia, I'd say). I want to thank Matthias for his extra effort of reworking the gnome-session patch after my concern, though. Cheers, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 03:03:36PM +0100, Vincent Untz wrote: Another systemd-related change was already mentioned earlier: the new --enable-systemd configure flag that removes ConsoleKit support when it's used. It cannot really be used for openSUSE (and Mageia, I'd say). I want to thank Matthias for his extra effort of reworking the gnome-session patch after my concern, though. I have notified Mageia of --enable-systemd a while ago, but didn't discuss it yet. I know Mageia will be full systemd only in version 3, but not sure regarding version 2. I haven't made my mind up regarding version 2, perhaps easier to just rely on ConsoleKit in v2, then --enable-systemd in version 3. Leaning to not think and fully let the other people at Mageia investigate. Note: Only have been doing packaging since Aug 2011, I don't consider myself knowledgeable. I'll present to the development list and see what they say. The Mageia GNOME team is really small though; once you do something, you're basically considered in charge :P (somewhat scary) -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Hi all! I took some time and improved PortabilityMatrix in a way that I find easier to understand and that makes more clear which part of the stack are supported by different system. If you like it, feel free to use it as the official version: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix/Improved Short note: I removed the udisks and upower rows as they don't follow the system of showing the part of GNOME using some technologie. Instead those are referred to by the gnome-disk-utility and gnome-control-center/power rows which is IMHO the correct way. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
hi; On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering mzta...@0pointer.de wrote: Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? IIRC ubuntu did some work there: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit I guess the question from Ryan was more like: what happens on systems without an implementation of that D-Bus API which systemd provides? ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering mzta...@0pointer.de wrote: Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? IIRC ubuntu did some work there: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit I guess the question from Ryan was more like: what happens on systems without an implementation of that D-Bus API which systemd provides? I guess we need to review, expand and announce the following again: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 01:23:23PM +0200, Ionut Biru wrote: I guess we need to review, expand and announce the following again: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix I don't want to sound picky, but since when SystemD is a blessed dependency? It is called systemd, and it is NOT a dependency. What we depend on is a few simple dbus APIs. If an OS doesn't implement those APIs, certain functionality won't work. These APIs have been implemented in systemd, but they can (and are being) implemented elsewhere. What I've said above is nothing new btw (to me). It has been discussed openly, think on this mailing list. What I am suggesting now is that we clearly document this (depend on the API being implemented). -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: hi Bastien, On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08 Author: Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 + datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have to provide a compatible D-Bus service. It can be something extracted from systemd, or something new and revived from the old date and time mechanism, but it won't be something we support and maintain in gnome-settings-daemon. FWIW, the old backend supported Fedora, SUSE and Debian systems, nothing else. So the portability problem would have happened on other systems (such as the *BSDs or Solaris), whether or not we made those changes. And I'm glad I have 3000 less lines code to maintain. Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On vie, 2012-01-20 at 04:25 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Thu, 19.01.12 17:49, Ryan Lortie (de...@desrt.ca) wrote: hi Bastien, On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08 Author: Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 + datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? IIRC ubuntu did some work there: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit IIRC, the datetime one wasn't added, but yes, it should be added quite easily, as it was done with the other DBus interfaces ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:34 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering mzta...@0pointer.de wrote: Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? IIRC ubuntu did some work there: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit I guess the question from Ryan was more like: what happens on systems without an implementation of that D-Bus API which systemd provides? I guess we need to review, expand and announce the following again: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix I don't know who filled in the line for the date time mechanism, but there was never any OpenBSD support in the old mechanism. I've updated the page to link to timedated from systemd now. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On 2012-01-20 at 13:23, Ionut Biru wrote: Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? IIRC ubuntu did some work there: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit I guess the question from Ryan was more like: what happens on systems without an implementation of that D-Bus API which systemd provides? I guess we need to review, expand and announce the following again: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix I don't want to sound picky, but since when SystemD is a blessed dependency? the dependency is not on systemd - it's on a DBus API. systemd provides one implementation of that DBus API. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 01:57:37PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:37:44PM +, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:34 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering mzta...@0pointer.de wrote: Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? IIRC ubuntu did some work there: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit I guess the question from Ryan was more like: what happens on systems without an implementation of that D-Bus API which systemd provides? I guess we need to review, expand and announce the following again: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix I don't know who filled in the line for the date time mechanism, but there was never any OpenBSD support in the old mechanism. True. I can confirm that (although work was ongoing). Meh, I forgot to mention that settings the time/Region/City... worked fine. Only NTP wasn't supported. -- Antoine ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 13:23 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote: On 01/20/2012 10:34 AM, Olav Vitters wrote: On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering mzta...@0pointer.de wrote: Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? IIRC ubuntu did some work there: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit I guess the question from Ryan was more like: what happens on systems without an implementation of that D-Bus API which systemd provides? I guess we need to review, expand and announce the following again: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix I don't want to sound picky, but since when SystemD is a blessed dependency? It's an external dependency, since we discussed it in spring 2011, in this thread: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2011-May/msg00427.html And we don't depend on systemd (otherwise there are patches in gnome-settings-daemon and gnome-control-center for which we could remove the #ifdef's), we depend on a D-Bus service being present, which is shipped by systemd. Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 13:57 +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:37:44PM +, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:34 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering mzta...@0pointer.de wrote: Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? IIRC ubuntu did some work there: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit I guess the question from Ryan was more like: what happens on systems without an implementation of that D-Bus API which systemd provides? I guess we need to review, expand and announce the following again: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix I don't know who filled in the line for the date time mechanism, but there was never any OpenBSD support in the old mechanism. True. I can confirm that (although work was ongoing). I'm sure the work can be reused to port the systemd service to OpenBSD (and port hostnamed too!). I've updated the page to link to timedated from systemd now. Thanks. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On 01/20/2012 03:06 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 13:23 +0200, Ionut Biru wrote: On 01/20/2012 10:34 AM, Olav Vitters wrote: On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:04:36AM +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: On 20 January 2012 03:25, Lennart Poettering mzta...@0pointer.de wrote: Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? IIRC ubuntu did some work there: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit I guess the question from Ryan was more like: what happens on systems without an implementation of that D-Bus API which systemd provides? I guess we need to review, expand and announce the following again: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix I don't want to sound picky, but since when SystemD is a blessed dependency? It's an external dependency, since we discussed it in spring 2011, in this thread: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2011-May/msg00427.html I know the discussion and if I'm not wrong, the overall conclusion was a big no no no to systemd. Also Lennart promised that providers can be used standalone and absolutely no effort was made to ensure that and packaging separately will require some hacking to the build systems. And we don't depend on systemd (otherwise there are patches in gnome-settings-daemon and gnome-control-center for which we could remove the #ifdef's), we depend on a D-Bus service being present, which is shipped by systemd. Cheers -- Ionuț ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 20.01.12 15:13, Ionut Biru (io...@archlinux.ro) wrote: I know the discussion and if I'm not wrong, the overall conclusion was a big no no no to systemd. Also Lennart promised that providers can be used standalone and absolutely no effort was made to ensure that and packaging separately will require some hacking to the build systems. I did? I am pretty sure I didn't, why would I bother? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
hi Bastien, On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have to provide a compatible D-Bus service. This is what I guessed you'd say. It can be something extracted from systemd, or something new and revived from the old date and time mechanism, but it won't be something we support and maintain in gnome-settings-daemon. And I'm glad I have 3000 less lines code to maintain. I'm just a little bit concerned about how this looks. I love when we can delete code, but we're doing it by disabling a previously-working feature for a portion of our users. If we introduced new optional features that depended on a particular systemd functionality in order to operate, it would be one thing. We do that often. This change is a regression of existing functionality in the name of I don't feel like maintaining it anymore. I'd also feel a bit better if I thought you had made efforts to get in touch with those that would be affected by this regression. Ubuntu isn't shipping GNOME 3.4 g-s-d/g-c-c, this cycle, for example, but for the last week I've been trying to convince them that they should. If I had succeeded (which I am now glad I didn't) then this change would have been a royal pain, creating a whole lot of new work to fit into an already full schedule. Many of our own end-users will still want to install GNOME 3.4 onto their Ubuntu systems (myself included). I look forward to the mention in our release notes about how they can no longer change their time because we wanted to delete a bit of code. Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Le 20/01/2012 13:00, Olav Vitters a écrit : It is called systemd, and it is NOT a dependency. What we depend on is a few simple dbus APIs. If an OS doesn't implement those APIs, certain functionality won't work. These APIs have been implemented in systemd, but they can (and are being) implemented elsewhere. What I've said above is nothing new btw (to me). It has been discussed openly, think on this mailing list. What I am suggesting now is that we clearly document this (depend on the API being implemented). Hi, Ok, so as a distributor of GNOME I think that what we (Ubuntu) would like to see: - some public list of what services GNOME rely on to be fully working - some public announce earlier in the cycle, or if possible one cycle in advance of what API will need to be provided for the next GNOME release to be fully working - some details (spec?) about the API used for those who want to implement compatible ones It's fine to be using new services but if GNOME wants distributors to provide a good GNOME experience system requirements should be announced in advances with a clear description of the protocol to give enough time to integrators to work on providing those services. Cheers, Sebastien Bacher ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:47 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: hi Bastien, On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have to provide a compatible D-Bus service. This is what I guessed you'd say. Why did you ask then? :) It can be something extracted from systemd, or something new and revived from the old date and time mechanism, but it won't be something we support and maintain in gnome-settings-daemon. And I'm glad I have 3000 less lines code to maintain. I'm just a little bit concerned about how this looks. I love when we can delete code, but we're doing it by disabling a previously-working feature for a portion of our users. If we introduced new optional features that depended on a particular systemd functionality in order to operate, it would be one thing. We do that often. This change is a regression of existing functionality in the name of I don't feel like maintaining it anymore. No, it's a different API, so I would have needed to rewrite the code to support the new API anyway. And I would have needed to rewrite most of it to use GDBus instead of dbus-glib. I'd also feel a bit better if I thought you had made efforts to get in touch with those that would be affected by this regression. Ubuntu isn't shipping GNOME 3.4 g-s-d/g-c-c, this cycle, for example, but for the last week I've been trying to convince them that they should. If I had succeeded (which I am now glad I didn't) then this change would have been a royal pain, creating a whole lot of new work to fit into an already full schedule. What about the schedule of the gnome-control-center maintainers? I have other things to work on too. This particular change was mentioned nearly a year ago on this very same list. It's not my fault Ubuntu (in this particular case) didn't take the hint to start packaging the relevant D-Bus services, or rewriting them to fit their use. Many of our own end-users will still want to install GNOME 3.4 onto their Ubuntu systems (myself included). I look forward to the mention in our release notes about how they can no longer change their time because we wanted to delete a bit of code. You're making a fuss because you (Ubuntu) didn't plan ahead. No, I didn't do this to piss off Ubuntu or Canonical, because I have better things to do, like writing GNOME code. Stop this us vs. them thing, and get them to package up the missing bits. An afternoon's work, and no need to scream bloody murder. /Bastien, getting frankly annoyed ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On 20 January 2012 08:47, Ryan Lortie de...@desrt.ca wrote: hi Bastien, On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have to provide a compatible D-Bus service. This is what I guessed you'd say. It can be something extracted from systemd, or something new and revived from the old date and time mechanism, but it won't be something we support and maintain in gnome-settings-daemon. And I'm glad I have 3000 less lines code to maintain. I'm just a little bit concerned about how this looks. I love when we can delete code, but we're doing it by disabling a previously-working feature for a portion of our users. If we introduced new optional features that depended on a particular systemd functionality in order to operate, it would be one thing. We do that often. This change is a regression of existing functionality in the name of I don't feel like maintaining it anymore. I'd also feel a bit better if I thought you had made efforts to get in touch with those that would be affected by this regression. Ubuntu isn't shipping GNOME 3.4 g-s-d/g-c-c, this cycle, for example, but for the last week I've been trying to convince them that they should. If I had succeeded (which I am now glad I didn't) then this change would have been a royal pain, creating a whole lot of new work to fit into an already full schedule. Many of our own end-users will still want to install GNOME 3.4 onto their Ubuntu systems (myself included). I look forward to the mention in our release notes about how they can no longer change their time because we wanted to delete a bit of code. I agree with desrt. I've been actively working to package the parts of GNOME 3.4 that won't make it into the next Ubuntu release so that people that want the latest GNOME can have easy access to it via a PPA. While writing the extra code that Debian and Ubuntu will need may only take a day or a few days' work for you, it's probably beyond my abilities. I was going to make a final request before Ubuntu's feature freeze for g-c-c/g-s-d 3.4 to be reconsidered since it works except for some minor work needed in lightdm and unity. That work will have to be done anyway if we even want g-c-c 3.4 to be made available in the extra PPA. Dropping support for Debian Ubuntu doesn't seem a very friendly move, and it's only going to delay getting GNOME 3.4 into the hands of your user base. Jeremy ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 15:06 +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote: Le 20/01/2012 13:00, Olav Vitters a écrit : It is called systemd, and it is NOT a dependency. What we depend on is a few simple dbus APIs. If an OS doesn't implement those APIs, certain functionality won't work. These APIs have been implemented in systemd, but they can (and are being) implemented elsewhere. What I've said above is nothing new btw (to me). It has been discussed openly, think on this mailing list. What I am suggesting now is that we clearly document this (depend on the API being implemented). Hi, Ok, so as a distributor of GNOME I think that what we (Ubuntu) would like to see: - some public list of what services GNOME rely on to be fully working - some public announce earlier in the cycle, or if possible one cycle in advance of what API will need to be provided for the next GNOME release to be fully working - some details (spec?) about the API used for those who want to implement compatible ones It's fine to be using new services but if GNOME wants distributors to provide a good GNOME experience system requirements should be announced in advances with a clear description of the protocol to give enough time to integrators to work on providing those services. Most of them are listed in the page that Olav pointed to: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix Not updating it for the latest changes is my mistake. The actual talk of using systemd's timedated and localed services was in May 2011: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2011-May/msg00429.html And the bugzilla itself (for which you receive notification mails) opened since September. I think that's enough time to implement the functionality. Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 03:06:45PM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote: Ok, so as a distributor of GNOME I think that what we (Ubuntu) would like to see: Agree fully.. is what I meant with the other email (which I sent before reading this one). I think we should put that somewhere in our standard schedule (the http://www.gnome.org/start/unstable one). -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 02:49:01PM +, Bastien Nocera wrote: I think that's enough time to implement the functionality. I'd like to see that distributor-list used when a decision is reached. I guess this is a task for the release-team. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:47:28AM -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: Many of our own end-users will still want to install GNOME 3.4 onto their Ubuntu systems (myself included). I look forward to the mention in our release notes about how they can no longer change their time because we wanted to delete a bit of code. FWIW and IMO, this is a packaging issue. If you want to provide GNOME 3.4, you'll need to ensure you have the right functionality in your OS/distribution. I'm not sure in above quote when you refer to GNOME or when to Ubuntu. However, I don't see the relevance of mentioning Ubuntu in the GNOME 3.4 release notes. If you want to provide GNOME 3.4, there are certain requirements and they sometimes change. We should work together and reach out though to affected parties... and IMO well known that I/release team could improve on that. Fortunately 3.4 is not out yet. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Le 20/01/2012 15:47, Olav Vitters a écrit : FWIW and IMO, this is a packaging issue. If you want to provide GNOME 3.4, you'll need to ensure you have the right functionality in your OS/distribution. Well, GNOME should start by communicating what are the right functionality and doing it one cycle is advance would be nice, you can't assume that all your distributors track every git commit and will be able to accomodate new requirements added some weeks before feature freeze. Could you also point to a GNOME documentations telling what methods on this dbus service the system should implement for GNOME to be working correctly? The current way of doing things just seem far to be professional, GNOME can probably do much better on communicating their requirement and documenting them. Cheers, Sebastien Bacher ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 09:48 -0500, Jeremy Bicha wrote: snip While writing the extra code that Debian and Ubuntu will need may only take a day or a few days' work for you, it's probably beyond my abilities. I don't think it is. Take systemd's tarball, and call it systemd-services. Package up systemd's D-Bus services, without the rest of the init system. Then you can test and better your Debian specific patches for those services. Dropping support for Debian Ubuntu doesn't seem a very friendly move, and it's only going to delay getting GNOME 3.4 into the hands of your user base. We're not dropping support. We're expecting the distributions to ship their own config files modifying D-Bus services. You can use systemd, or not, that's irrelevant. The point is that we shouldn't have a if (fedora) else if (debian) else if (suse) else if... in GNOME code. This does that. And if you _really_ wanted to ship GNOME 3.4 in Ubuntu without packaging up systemd's D-Bus services, you can also revert the 2 patches. Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:37 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: the dependency is not on systemd - it's on a DBus API. systemd provides one implementation of that DBus API. I think that this would be more apparent if the DBus interface descriptions were maintained outside of the systemd codebase. If they're maintained inside the systemd codebase, for all practical purposes you're depending on a particular version of systemd to provide the version of the interfaces you support. They will change, if the only way to express this change is through a systemd version number, you're depending on systemd. It seems to me that this would be a good usage of Freedesktop. I'd be happy to maintain such a repository if people would be willing to use it. --Ted signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Le 20/01/2012 15:49, Bastien Nocera a écrit : Most of them are listed in the page that Olav pointed to: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix Not updating it for the latest changes is my mistake. This wiki page is something but it would be better if GNOME could: - do public announces a cycle in advance of what new system requirements will be added to let distributors adapt to those - document somewhere what interfaces exactly are required and since when The actual talk of using systemd's timedated and localed services was in May 2011: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2011-May/msg00429.html And the bugzilla itself (for which you receive notification mails) opened since September. I think that's enough time to implement the functionality. Right, out of the fact that there were different opinions in the community on those topic and no consensus in that discussion, nor project statement that those new requirements had been approved and would be enforced. Cheers, Sebastien Bacher ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: hi Bastien, On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08 Author: Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 + datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have to provide a compatible D-Bus service. It can be something extracted from systemd, or something new and revived from the old date and time mechanism, but it won't be something we support and maintain in gnome-settings-daemon. Then we need to clearly communicate what we expect distributors to provide. What systemd interfaces are we allowed to depend on without asking? Any of them? I'm not going to read that old 116-post thread on d-d-l to find out. We used to provide pages like this for every release: http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointNinetyone/ExternalDependencies Now, not so much. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:59 -0600, Ted Gould wrote: I think that this would be more apparent if the DBus interface descriptions were maintained outside of the systemd codebase. http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/timedated I won't comment on if you accept this as being sufficiently divorced from systemd or not... Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 10:12 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 17:49 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: hi Bastien, On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08 Author: Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 + datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have to provide a compatible D-Bus service. It can be something extracted from systemd, or something new and revived from the old date and time mechanism, but it won't be something we support and maintain in gnome-settings-daemon. Then we need to clearly communicate what we expect distributors to provide. What systemd interfaces are we allowed to depend on without asking? The systemd interfaces that don't rely on systemd being the init system. In this case, hostnamed, localed and timedated. I'm sure we'll get to have discussions again when ConsoleKit goes away. For now, the multi-seat support code in systemd is a compile-time option for gnome-control-center, and soon for gnome-settings-daemon. Any of them? I'm not going to read that old 116-post thread on d-d-l to find out. We used to provide pages like this for every release: http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointNinetyone/ExternalDependencies Now, not so much. This should have been updated: https://live.gnome.org/PortabilityMatrix ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 14:30 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: This particular change was mentioned nearly a year ago on this very same list. It's not my fault Ubuntu (in this particular case) didn't take the hint to start packaging the relevant D-Bus services, or rewriting them to fit their use. If you are referring to the discussion that happened last May, I would consider it a mention, certainly... but nothing like any sort of a notification. You said that you wouldn't mind making use of the interfaces, but would prefer if Lennart could make more efforts to split them out so they could be used on other platforms. Lennart replied that he would do no such thing, and as far as I know, that was the end of the conversation. This doesn't fit my idea of effective communication of intent. You're making a fuss because you (Ubuntu) Are you attempting to annoy me... Stop this us vs. them thing ...or just set up for a double-take? and get them to package up the missing bits. An afternoon's work, and no need to scream bloody murder. As mentioned above -- Lennart has no intention of making it easy to use his code outside of systemd (and I don't blame him). This is not a matter of some simple packaging -- more like reimplementing a D-Bus interface in a new code base (which could originally be copied out of systemd, but then would have to be maintained separately). This is not an afternoon's work. Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 10:22 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:59 -0600, Ted Gould wrote: I think that this would be more apparent if the DBus interface descriptions were maintained outside of the systemd codebase. http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/timedated I won't comment on if you accept this as being sufficiently divorced from systemd or not... From the wiki page: systemd 30 and newer include systemd-timedated I would conclude that any dependency on that interface is a dependency on systemd version 30 or newer. Therefore, GNOME has that as a dependency in 3.4 on systemd 30. To be clear, I don't think that's a problem in how the page is written, I think that's a reality of where the interface is defined. --Ted signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Sebastien Bacher seb...@ubuntu.com wrote: Le 20/01/2012 15:49, Bastien Nocera a écrit : This wiki page is something but it would be better if GNOME could: - do public announces a cycle in advance of what new system requirements will be added to let distributors adapt to those - document somewhere what interfaces exactly are required and since when There's a lot of gnome-should-do-this and gnome-should-do-that in this thread. How about: distributors should keep on top of what's happening with the things they are distributing ? Or maybe you just don't have time for that because you are busy working on your own platform ? Anyway, I agree that we should keep the portability matrix updated, I'll give it a look today. Matthias ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Le 20/01/2012 17:28, Matthias Clasen a écrit : How about: distributors should keep on top of what's happening with the things they are distributing ? Right, that's one possibility (and basically what it's happening nowadays), but it makes the distributors' job harder and so increases the likeness that GNOME users will get a suboptimal experience on their distribution. It's neither a win situation for GNOME since it's not showing as good as it should for those users nor for the distributors. Or maybe you just don't have time for that because you are busy working on your own platform ? Dunno for others but speaking for Ubuntu as a distribution we do keep with what is happening. This cycle we decided to stay on GNOME 3.2 so we are fine and we will have time to add the services required before landing 3.4 next cycle. Jeremy and some others are working to provide GNOME 3.4 in a ppa for the users who want it though, that will like create issues for them and for the users who will run the next version and will get a degraded experience. It's also going to be an issue for i.e Debian. They seemed to be looking at GNOME 3.4 for the next release (their freeze is a bit after 3.4) but they will not use systemd by default so they either have to figure what they can do with their limited resources, ship with non working features, or stay on 3.2. Cheers, Sebastien Bacher ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 10:29 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: snip and get them to package up the missing bits. An afternoon's work, and no need to scream bloody murder. As mentioned above -- Lennart has no intention of making it easy to use his code outside of systemd (and I don't blame him). This is not a matter of some simple packaging -- more like reimplementing a D-Bus interface in a new code base (which could originally be copied out of systemd, but then would have to be maintained separately). This is not an afternoon's work. In about 40 minutes, I created a binary RPM[1] that contains the 3 services we care about in GNOME from the systemd Fedora package. I believe you do something similar. 1) Try to make it compile on your distribution. I needed that patch: https://gist.github.com/1648337 That's the hardest part if your distribution isn't one listed here: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/configure.ac#n411 Make sure to disable everything you don't need, for example: https://gist.github.com/1648324#L57 2) Remove all the unnecessary files from the installed package: https://gist.github.com/1648324#L81 3) Make the D-Bus service work with D-Bus instead of systemd: https://gist.github.com/1648324#L99 Voila. You have something that kind of works. Patches for Debian/Ubuntu specific support can go upstream. Cheers [1]: That would be because it's been so long I was a Debian Developer, they revoked my account. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Am 20. Januar 2012 17:50 schrieb Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 10:29 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: snip and get them to package up the missing bits. An afternoon's work, and no need to scream bloody murder. As mentioned above -- Lennart has no intention of making it easy to use his code outside of systemd (and I don't blame him). This is not a matter of some simple packaging -- more like reimplementing a D-Bus interface in a new code base (which could originally be copied out of systemd, but then would have to be maintained separately). This is not an afternoon's work. In about 40 minutes, I created a binary RPM[1] that contains the 3 services we care about in GNOME from the systemd Fedora package. I believe you do something similar. It's unfortunately not as simple as that as far as Debian is concerned or any other non-Linux distro. systemd is Linux-only. The aforementioned components timedated, hostnamed and localed can't be compiled on non-Linux systems. -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 04:00:47PM +0100, Sebastien Bacher wrote: The current way of doing things just seem far to be professional, GNOME can probably do much better on communicating their requirement and documenting them. I said that as well in the bit you didn't quote + in other emails. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
hi; On 20 January 2012 17:12, Michael Biebl mbi...@gmail.com wrote: It's unfortunately not as simple as that as far as Debian is concerned or any other non-Linux distro. systemd is Linux-only. The aforementioned components timedated, hostnamed and localed can't be compiled on non-Linux systems. this hasn't changed: non-Linux systems were not supported before either. actually using, by a neutral DBus interface instead of ad hoc code for each platform, it may be easier to get support on other platforms without requiring to patch g-c-c directly. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
Le 20/01/2012 17:50, Bastien Nocera a écrit : In about 40 minutes, I created a binary RPM[1] that contains the 3 services we care about in GNOME from the systemd Fedora package. I believe you do something similar. Thanks, that works but is not really optiomal (i.e that could easily lead to a non well maintained,half broken systemd in Ubuntu because it has been packaged by people who care only about the services and not about the other features from systemd). But anyway from a distributor perspective this specific problem is orthogonal to the discussion: - the issue is not Debian,Ubuntu specific - the issue is not that distributors have work to do to integrate GNOME - nobody asked you to solve integration issues for downstreams What as a downstream we would like is early communication from the project on what platform requirements will be added so we have time to do our work and deliver a good GNOME experience to our GNOME users. Cheers, Sebastien Bacher ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote: On 20 January 2012 17:12, Michael Biebl mbi...@gmail.com wrote: It's unfortunately not as simple as that as far as Debian is concerned or any other non-Linux distro. systemd is Linux-only. The aforementioned components timedated, hostnamed and localed can't be compiled on non-Linux systems. this hasn't changed: non-Linux systems were not supported before either. actually using, by a neutral DBus interface instead of ad hoc code for each platform, it may be easier to get support on other platforms without requiring to patch g-c-c directly. For those finding it hard to understand how this is better than before: Try to think of it as a freedesktop standard for time and date (like org.fdo.Notifications). It even uses the same DBus namespace! Once a provider is implemented (by porting timedated or whatever) it can be reused everywhere. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On 20 Jan 2012, at 17:21, Sebastien Bacher seb...@ubuntu.com wrote: Le 20/01/2012 17:50, Bastien Nocera a écrit : In about 40 minutes, I created a binary RPM[1] that contains the 3 services we care about in GNOME from the systemd Fedora package. I believe you do something similar. Thanks, that works but is not really optiomal (i.e that could easily lead to a non well maintained,half broken systemd in Ubuntu because it has been packaged by people who care only about the services and not about the other features from systemd). But anyway from a distributor perspective this specific problem is orthogonal to the discussion: - the issue is not Debian,Ubuntu specific They're the only ones really complaining though... The others took it upon themselves to do the integration work. Only Fedora, Debian/Ubuntu and SUSE were supported. SUSE haven't complained either. - the issue is not that distributors have work to do to integrate GNOME - nobody asked you to solve integration issues for downstreams What as a downstream we would like is early communication from the project on what platform requirements will be added so we have time to do our work and deliver a good GNOME experience to our GNOME users. You're missing the fact that you (personally) received emails about that feature by virtue of being subscribed to gnome-control-center bugs. Consider this a, if rather late, notice that we'll use the systemd timedated API in GNOME 3.4. I believe enough work-arounds have been given for the downstreams for which it's a problem. But at the end of the day, planning is pretty complicated when I'm the only person reviewing project-wide patches in g-c-c. So you get the notice at the same time as others, myself included: when I merge the patch. Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On 01/20/2012 06:33 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: Try to think of it as a freedesktop standard for time and date (like org.fdo.Notifications). It even uses the same DBus namespace! Once a provider is implemented (by porting timedated or whatever) it can be reused everywhere. It might be wise to just make it a plain, documented, dbus spec. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 20.01.12 08:47, Ryan Lortie (de...@desrt.ca) wrote: hi Bastien, On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: No, the distributions/systems that choose not to use systemd will have to provide a compatible D-Bus service. This is what I guessed you'd say. It can be something extracted from systemd, or something new and revived from the old date and time mechanism, but it won't be something we support and maintain in gnome-settings-daemon. And I'm glad I have 3000 less lines code to maintain. I'm just a little bit concerned about how this looks. I love when we can delete code, but we're doing it by disabling a previously-working feature for a portion of our users. If we introduced new optional features that depended on a particular systemd functionality in order to operate, it would be one thing. We do that often. This change is a regression of existing functionality in the name of I don't feel like maintaining it anymore. I'd also feel a bit better if I thought you had made efforts to get in touch with those that would be affected by this regression. Ubuntu isn't shipping GNOME 3.4 g-s-d/g-c-c, this cycle, for example, but for the last week I've been trying to convince them that they should. If I had succeeded (which I am now glad I didn't) then this change would have been a royal pain, creating a whole lot of new work to fit into an already full schedule. Many of our own end-users will still want to install GNOME 3.4 onto their Ubuntu systems (myself included). I look forward to the mention in our release notes about how they can no longer change their time because we wanted to delete a bit of code. Note that The Ubuntu folks have been well aware of all of this coming. How I know that? Because at their last UDS they scheduled a session about rewriting those mechanisms for Ubuntu, and they even have a project page up on launchpad: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 20.01.12 10:29, Ryan Lortie (de...@desrt.ca) wrote: As mentioned above -- Lennart has no intention of making it easy to use his code outside of systemd (and I don't blame him). This is not a matter of some simple packaging -- more like reimplementing a D-Bus interface in a new code base (which could originally be copied out of systemd, but then would have to be maintained separately). This is not an afternoon's work. Given that Ubuntu already has code for these mechanisms, and a lots of DONEs on https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit I'd assume that their code is already quite far ahead. It's targeted for their 12.04 release, which I think is the current one that is developed... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 20.01.12 21:50, Steve Frécinaux (nudr...@gmail.com) wrote: On 01/20/2012 06:33 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: Try to think of it as a freedesktop standard for time and date (like org.fdo.Notifications). It even uses the same DBus namespace! Once a provider is implemented (by porting timedated or whatever) it can be reused everywhere. It might be wise to just make it a plain, documented, dbus spec. Thank god I am so wise: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/timedated Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 20.01.12 15:06, Sebastien Bacher (seb...@ubuntu.com) wrote: Le 20/01/2012 13:00, Olav Vitters a écrit : It is called systemd, and it is NOT a dependency. What we depend on is a few simple dbus APIs. If an OS doesn't implement those APIs, certain functionality won't work. These APIs have been implemented in systemd, but they can (and are being) implemented elsewhere. What I've said above is nothing new btw (to me). It has been discussed openly, think on this mailing list. What I am suggesting now is that we clearly document this (depend on the API being implemented). Hi, Ok, so as a distributor of GNOME I think that what we (Ubuntu) would like to see: - some public list of what services GNOME rely on to be fully working - some public announce earlier in the cycle, or if possible one cycle in advance of what API will need to be provided for the next GNOME release to be fully working - some details (spec?) about the API used for those who want to implement compatible ones It's fine to be using new services but if GNOME wants distributors to provide a good GNOME experience system requirements should be announced in advances with a clear description of the protocol to give enough time to integrators to work on providing those services. You know, your complaining would be a bit more believable if Google wouldn't find this for us: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit So, the problem set has been known for a while, a number of Canonical desktop team members have been subscribed to that page, the documentation for the interfaces is all available, some code has already been written by Canonical. So I really don't see what went wrong here, except maybe that Canonical's internal communication didn't work out so well? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 20.01.12 08:59, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 12:37 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: the dependency is not on systemd - it's on a DBus API. systemd provides one implementation of that DBus API. I think that this would be more apparent if the DBus interface descriptions were maintained outside of the systemd codebase. Yes, and they are. http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/timedated http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/hostnamed http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/localed That's the problem with you people: one tries to be nice to you, and document it all in much detail outside of the codebase, keep the systemd name out of all the interfaces, to make it really easy for you guys to adopt this without having to touch this evil systemd stuff at all, but you don't appreciate it, you just complain anyway that we'd mistreat you and everything was just an evil plot against you. You guys were in the loop, you guys even wrote alternate implementation of this stuff already, you guys discussed it in detail at the last UDS. And I was very nice to you by keeping the systemd name out of it and documenting it on fdo, and Bastien even showed you how easy it is two build the relevant systemd components without having to adopt systemd all the way. So you have multiple ways out of your perceived problem! So, what more do you want? There's nothing to complain about. Instead, I'd very much appreciate a thank you though. It seems to me that this would be a good usage of Freedesktop. I'd be happy to maintain such a repository if people would be willing to use it. Yeah, it's a great use of fdo, and that's why I put it on fdo. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 20.01.12 09:39, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 10:22 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 08:59 -0600, Ted Gould wrote: I think that this would be more apparent if the DBus interface descriptions were maintained outside of the systemd codebase. http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/timedated I won't comment on if you accept this as being sufficiently divorced from systemd or not... From the wiki page: systemd 30 and newer include systemd-timedated I would conclude that any dependency on that interface is a dependency on systemd version 30 or newer. Therefore, GNOME has that as a dependency in 3.4 on systemd 30. To be clear, I don't think that's a problem in how the page is written, I think that's a reality of where the interface is defined. Hmm, cool. If it's from the systemd project it must be evil? I totally see that, thank you. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 20.01.12 15:25, Bastien Nocera (had...@hadess.net) wrote: Then we need to clearly communicate what we expect distributors to provide. What systemd interfaces are we allowed to depend on without asking? The systemd interfaces that don't rely on systemd being the init system. In this case, hostnamed, localed and timedated. I'm sure we'll get to have discussions again when ConsoleKit goes away. For now, the multi-seat support code in systemd is a compile-time option for gnome-control-center, and soon for gnome-settings-daemon. gdm's coming multi-seat support is a compile and runtime option. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 23:20 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 20.01.12 08:59, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote: It seems to me that this would be a good usage of Freedesktop. I'd be happy to maintain such a repository if people would be willing to use it. Yeah, it's a great use of fdo, and that's why I put it on fdo. Just to be clear, you'd be happy if the interfaces were moved to a different repository that was versioned independently of systemd? And then systemd could depend on a particular release of those interfaces. So then, for instance, GNOME could say it depends on release 45 of the interfaces and a particular version of systemd could implement that version of the interfaces. If you're happy with that, I'm happy, let's set up a repo. --Ted signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 20.01.12 16:29, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 23:20 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 20.01.12 08:59, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote: It seems to me that this would be a good usage of Freedesktop. I'd be happy to maintain such a repository if people would be willing to use it. Yeah, it's a great use of fdo, and that's why I put it on fdo. Just to be clear, you'd be happy if the interfaces were moved to a different repository that was versioned independently of systemd? And then systemd could depend on a particular release of those interfaces. Honestly, I don't see why. The wiki is just fine. The interfaces are versioned independently of systemd (that's why their interface names and object paths contain version numbers (currently at 1). And those version numbers are specific to the API, and entirely unrelated to systemd. It's basically how D-Bus versioning is generally accepted to work). I already maintain a ton of stuff, and I try to keep maintenance burden and bureaucracy small for myself. Hence the Wiki, and not a complex standards process and a git repo. All API versioning we need should be done within the D-Bus interface itself (where the right place is for it anyway) and all documentation versioning by using the history functionality of the wiki. So then, for instance, GNOME could say it depends on release 45 of the interfaces and a particular version of systemd could implement that version of the interfaces. It should just say it depends on the D-Bus interface org.freedesktop.hostname1, and that should be sufficiently exact, and is easily readable from the GNOME sources... If you're happy with that, I'm happy, let's set up a repo. Thanks, but no thanks. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 23:48 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 20.01.12 16:29, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 23:20 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 20.01.12 08:59, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote: It seems to me that this would be a good usage of Freedesktop. I'd be happy to maintain such a repository if people would be willing to use it. Yeah, it's a great use of fdo, and that's why I put it on fdo. Just to be clear, you'd be happy if the interfaces were moved to a different repository that was versioned independently of systemd? And then systemd could depend on a particular release of those interfaces. Honestly, I don't see why. The wiki is just fine. The interfaces are versioned independently of systemd (that's why their interface names and object paths contain version numbers (currently at 1). And those version numbers are specific to the API, and entirely unrelated to systemd. It's basically how D-Bus versioning is generally accepted to work). I already maintain a ton of stuff, and I try to keep maintenance burden and bureaucracy small for myself. Hence the Wiki, and not a complex standards process and a git repo. All API versioning we need should be done within the D-Bus interface itself (where the right place is for it anyway) and all documentation versioning by using the history functionality of the wiki. I guess that I don't see that as adequate (hence why I suggested something more formal). One way that I had thought this could work on the Debian packaging side of things would be using the Requires/Provides labels in the package. So then something like systemd could provide freedesktop-system-interfaces-45 and GNOME could require that. There could also be other providers and users who wanted to switch would then get their choice. Pulling the version number from the wiki for all the different interfaces would make that complex and burdensome to maintain for the packagers involved. Which is why I suggested something with a more stable and uniform release process. --Ted signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Fri, 20.01.12 17:08, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote: I already maintain a ton of stuff, and I try to keep maintenance burden and bureaucracy small for myself. Hence the Wiki, and not a complex standards process and a git repo. All API versioning we need should be done within the D-Bus interface itself (where the right place is for it anyway) and all documentation versioning by using the history functionality of the wiki. I guess that I don't see that as adequate (hence why I suggested something more formal). What could be more formal than a machine readable interface definition as it is included in the Wiki page? One way that I had thought this could work on the Debian packaging side of things would be using the Requires/Provides labels in the package. So then something like systemd could provide freedesktop-system-interfaces-45 and GNOME could require that. Right. What could be a better identifier for an interface and its version, than, well, the interface name which includes the version? i.e. use org.freedesktop.timedate1 for that. And if you don't like the dots, then replace them by dashes or so, for use by your package manager. There could also be other providers and users who wanted to switch would then get their choice. Pulling the version number from the wiki for all the different interfaces would make that complex and burdensome to maintain for the packagers involved. Which is why I suggested something with a more stable and uniform release process. I am not sure how better to achieve uniformity and stability than by by using the version information that is embedded in the interface definition itself? I am sorry, but you explicitly *don't* want another level of naming or versioning here, because then you'd have to maintain multiple versioning streams for the same stuff, and that'd suck. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 01:07 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 20.01.12 17:08, Ted Gould (t...@gould.cx) wrote: I already maintain a ton of stuff, and I try to keep maintenance burden and bureaucracy small for myself. Hence the Wiki, and not a complex standards process and a git repo. All API versioning we need should be done within the D-Bus interface itself (where the right place is for it anyway) and all documentation versioning by using the history functionality of the wiki. I guess that I don't see that as adequate (hence why I suggested something more formal). What could be more formal than a machine readable interface definition as it is included in the Wiki page? I was more referring to formality of process rather than how the interface is specified. I imagine there won't be many versions of the interfaces, but there will be of the tools (like systemd) that implement them. One way that I had thought this could work on the Debian packaging side of things would be using the Requires/Provides labels in the package. So then something like systemd could provide freedesktop-system-interfaces-45 and GNOME could require that. Right. What could be a better identifier for an interface and its version, than, well, the interface name which includes the version? i.e. use org.freedesktop.timedate1 for that. And if you don't like the dots, then replace them by dashes or so, for use by your package manager. There could also be other providers and users who wanted to switch would then get their choice. Pulling the version number from the wiki for all the different interfaces would make that complex and burdensome to maintain for the packagers involved. Which is why I suggested something with a more stable and uniform release process. I am not sure how better to achieve uniformity and stability than by by using the version information that is embedded in the interface definition itself? I am sorry, but you explicitly *don't* want another level of naming or versioning here, because then you'd have to maintain multiple versioning streams for the same stuff, and that'd suck. So, let's use a simple use case. For what ever reason, it is decided that one of the interfaces needs a new property. I'm guessing that you'd expect that the interface name wouldn't change as it would be backwards compatible. Now GNOME Control Center comes along and needs that new property to implement their interface. How should G-C-C express that requirement? --Ted signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
hi Bastien, On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08 Author: Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 + datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [gnome-settings-daemon] datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism
On Thu, 19.01.12 17:49, Ryan Lortie (de...@desrt.ca) wrote: hi Bastien, On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 22:38 +, Bastien Nocera wrote: commit 27fa171efe4179c0a42ec79e0dc501077f042a08 Author: Bastien Nocera had...@hadess.net Date: Thu Jan 19 22:33:21 2012 + datetime: Remove datetime D-Bus mechanism Now that gnome-control-center uses systemd's date time mechanism[1], we don't need to ship our own mechanism for that purpose. This also removes the last user of dbus-glib in gnome-settings-daemon [2]. Are there plans to provide a systemd-compatible backend for those systems that cannot run systemd? IIRC ubuntu did some work there: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-p-systemd-packagekit Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
