On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 11:02:39AM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote: > On 01/06/2015 11:10 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 02:26:22PM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote: > >>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/wiki/DesignDocs/DBusResponder > >> > >>Hi, > >>I have take the following tikcet that is about implementing D-Bus calls for > >>domains, users and groups. I have some questions. > >> > >>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2150 > >> > >>*List and Find methods interface* > >>At this moment we implement all List* and Find* methods on > >>/org/freedesktop/sssd/infopipe and org.freedesktop.sssd.infopipe interface. > >> > >>The patches I sent today enables having support for different interfaces on > >>/path and /path/*, therefore we can implement the methods as: > >> > >>/infopipe/Users infopipe.Users.ListUsers() > >>/infopipe/Users/$UID user specific methods and properties > >> > >>instead of: > >>/infopipe infopipe.ListUsers() > >>/infopipe/Users/$UID user specific methods and properties > >> > >>I think it make sense. Is this something we want? > > > >Yes, I like this suggestion better, too. > > Do we agree on the following interface schema? Or do you have other > suggestions? > > /ifp/Users ifp.Users > /ifp/Users/* ifp.Users.User > > Methods will drop 'Users' keyword. I.e. ifp.Users.List() instead of > ifp.Users.ListUsers(). > > I though about ifp.User for the subtree but I don't really like when > interface name differs only in the ending 's'. That is quite error prone to > me.
What about changing infopipe to ifp? Or is that a typo? _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
