[Authentication] Spec review (part 1)
lemma at confuego.org
Mon Feb 28 07:08:04 PST 2011
2011/2/27 Stef Walter <stefw at collabora.co.uk>:
> On 02/26/2011 11:33 PM, Valentin Rusu wrote:
>> On 02/09/2011 09:14 PM, Stef Walter wrote:
>>> On 01/30/2011 08:38 PM, Michael Leupold wrote:
>>>>> So this leaves us with either:
>>>>> a) A "Type" property
>>>>> b) An optional "Type" attribute
>>>>> c) A "type" member in the Secret-struct
>>>>> I like a) for its simplicity, b) seems kinda awkward with the only
>>>>> benefit being that you could search/filter items by type, c) seems to
>>>>> be the cleanest solution. It provides consistency as you'd always
>>>>> get/set the actual value and its type in one go. I'd be in favour of
>>> How does the attached patch look?
>> Ok, I took your changes into account inside ksecretservice sources.
> That's great. I'll work on implementing them in gnome-keyring. I need to
> figure out where to put this extra field in the old gnome-keyring file
> At some point we'll switch over to a fancy-schmancy new file format, but
> we're not there yet.
> Michael, do you have any comments on the patch?
No, looks fine to me.
We (as the individual daemon and library developers) should make sure
we use similar data-types so each of our clients can display most or
all of them (eg. gnome-keyring should be able to display KDE
applications' values to the user). We'll keep you posted which types
we'll be using to support legacy KWallet secrets.
Thanks and regards,
More information about the Authentication