Hi all, It seems I got pretty late to this discussion because of vacation time... However I'd like to throw my 2 cents:
Cornelius, the draft looks really great from my POV. 2009/7/9 Rodney Dawes <[email protected]> > I generally disagree with the idea that in order to use the > org.freedesktop namespace for DBus interfaces, you must first gain > acceptance through having multiple desktops use your interface. This is absolutely necessary. Since there is no interconnection between desktop, say desktop A and desktop B are both developing a technology which is for the same purpose. It makes sense that they will have the same service name in the DBus namespace. You have created a conflict, because A would use org.freedesktop.Technology and desktop B would use org.freedesktop.Technology, with the services not even matching. >From my point of view, for using org.freedesktop namespace, the specification should have been approved as a fd.o standard. The other point of discussion, is obviously, the process of standarizing specifications in fd.o. Regards, Rafael Fernández López.
_______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
