On Friday, 2011-05-20, François Revol wrote: > >> Ummm, which preferences? For example, xdg-open does some heuristics to > >> determine which desktop environment is running, and then it just calls > >> gnome-open, kfmclient, exo-open, etc. as appropriate. > >> > >> (Yeah, it's kind of ugly. This D-Bus stuff would indeed make things > >> much easier.) > > > > Please excuse me for being slighlty offtopic, but being one of the > > initiators of the xdg-utils scripts I have to voice my agreement with > > this assessment. > > > > These scripts where intended as a quick work around until a more > > apporpriate solution like standardzed interfaces could be provided. > > > > Unfortunately this never happened for various reasons, so any move into > > that direction is highly appreciated. > > Hmm except some OS don't have D-Bus (like Haiku), but have a shell that can > run those. (I recall sending patches to add support for BeOS/Haiku btw...)
Right, but how many different workspace implementations are for these platforms? I would imagine that there might even be just one, which basically would already be the standardized interface on the respective platform. And applications built against their APIs will probably already have native options to achieve goals such as discussed in this thread. Of course there is still value in providing a command line interface (simple executable, shell script) for use in scripts or languages without direct access to the native APIs. Coming up with a agreed upon D-Bus interface for D-Bus using workspace providers would just serve as a similar "native" API shared between them and reduce the code paths in or separate implementations of command line helpers. Cheers, Kevin -- Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer KDE user support, developer mentoring
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
