On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 10:48 +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > given that the callback mechanism is necessary anyway, why introduce a > second system that manages state in the service? > o.fd.SessionManagement should start as a reimplementation of XSMP on > top of d-bus and keep compatibility with the state model, as it is to > be expected that for a reasonably long time to come every session > manager has to implement both protocols. > based on that, the inhibit would be just another callback round before > the usual saveYourself requests (which might request interaction).
Sure, point taken. I just wonder if this is a good time to think about what XSMP *could* or *should* do rather than just keep compatibility. Really, I'm just throwing ideas into the air. Richard. _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
