So if we have 10 clients monitoring the blacklist the daemon it will
result in 10 GetTemplates() calls on the bus? ;-) How about putting the
new list of templates in the Changed() signal? That way there'll be no
extra noise on the buzz when the list changes.

Anyway, I am still not entirely convinced about this API. I think
clients need a way to identify which blacklists come from where. I think
maybe a naming scheme would provide a better API. Like fx:

Let 'E' define the event dbus signature.

Methods:
 - GetTemplates() -> ({sE})
 - AddTemplate(s, E)
 - RemoveTemplate(s)
Signals:
 - Changed({sE})

Apps would use their normal namespaced bus names to construct blacklist
names. Like 'org.gnome.Epiphany.PrivateBrowsing' for the blacklist
template epiphany install when you enter private mode.

-- 
Blacklist API sucks
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/612344
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Zeitgeist
Framework Team, which is subscribed to Zeitgeist Framework.

Status in Zeitgeist Framework: New

Bug description:
Guys, GetBlacklist and SetBlacklist (without any signals) for an 
asynchrounous-by-nature API? Come on!

How about changing it to Get, Add, Remove and a changed signal? That way it'd 
be actually usable...



_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~zeitgeist
Post to     : zeitgeist@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~zeitgeist
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Reply via email to