On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 04:00 +0200, Jannis Pohlmann wrote: > I think we should improve the description of Unqueue a little bit. > Unqueue doesn't really prevent service-side implementations of unqueing > batch tasks (more than one URI queued as one handle) in the middle of > the task (e.g. after having generated thumbnails for 2 out of 10 URIs). > > This is exactly what e.g. file managers need though. Just imagine a > file manager enters a directory, queues all its files for thumbnailing > and then switches the directory before all files are processed by the > thumbnailer. So IMHO it should be pointed out more clearly that this is > not a violation of the spec. Right now it just says "You can't unqueue > requests that are currently running." This should be something like > "You cannot cancel the processing of individual URIs but thumbnailers > are free to support cancelling running tasks between the processing two > URIs when a task unqueued."
I don't think using this spec from a file manager is really a good idea, its quite a lot of overhead doing all this dbus i/o when loading a large directory. I certainly won't be using it in nautilus. I brought this up with philip when this was initially proposed, and the sense that I got from him was not that the file manager is meant to consume this interface, but rather to implement it. _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
