PowerManagement Spec Crazy Stuff
hughsient at gmail.com
Thu Mar 29 01:34:58 PDT 2007
On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 10:27 +0200, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> Hi Richard,
> Thanks for the work, it looks mostly good to me.
Cool, thanks for the review.
> Richard Hughes wrote:
> > I've uploaded version 0.1 of the power-management-spec here:
> > http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications_2fpower_2dmanagement_2dspec
> > Thanks everybody who helped review it, and provided positive (and
> > negative!) comments.
> > Next stage are the controversial bits. I really want one (or more) of
> > the *optional* Inhibit, Widget or Backlight extensions in API version
> > 0.2
> > Could you please review the draft document here:
> > http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/temp/dbus-interface.html
> > Just like last time, I'm open to dropping the crazy stuff, renaming the
> > methods and signals to be more sane or just doing things a completely
> > different way - so please comment with suggestions or criticisms.
> > I'll be slowly converting gnome-power-manager to use the version 0.1
> > specification in time for GNOME 2.20 - it would be good if the
> > kpowersave, guidance-power-manager, klaptop, gnome-panel and other
> > programs could try to implement v0.1 and provide feedback.
> Two issues (briefly read through the previous thread):
> - Should we make a difference between "canSuspend" and isAllowedToSuspend"
> (and hibernate, FWIW)? That way, one could still suspend after entering the
> right password if one's now allowed, i.e.
> if canSuspend and isAllowedToSuspend:
> elseif canSuspend and not isAllowedtoSuspend:
> asForPassword() && suspend()
> else: doNothingAndDontEvenShowTheOptionInTheUI
> In short, I think it makes sense to differentiate between: "You're not
> allowed to" and "the machine will not survive if you try to".
I don't think it's important, from the end user or GUI point of view.
This is interface is probably mostly going to be used for "do i show
this option in a gui?" where the differences between policy and
permissions are moot.
> - It would be nice to have idleTime in the interface, it's needed for
> suspending after a certain time when the machine is doing nothing. Is that
> an conscious omission? :-)
Well, I'm not sure how that would be useful as a use case. Got any
More information about the xdg