User bus conclusion

[Lennart Poettering]

On Wed, 10.11.10 09:25, Havoc Pennington (hp at pobox.com) wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Havoc Pennington <hp at pobox.com> wrote:
> > My take is that you _either_ declare that unsupported, and get the
> > benefits of your model for apps; or you keep essentially the current
> > model (at least from the perspective of apps, they remain
> > theoretically required to handle multiple sessions per user).
> 
> I guess an alternative is to have _GNOME_ require the OS configuration
> where each login joins an existing session. dbus remains as-is, but
> gnome-session or the like might puke if it detects the wrong OS
> config.

Well, I think we definitely want to inform the apps that they are
actually on a user bus. That's why I think Ryan's request to name this
bus differently if we share it between logins makes sense -- even if we
actually redirect all apps to the user bus if they ask for the session
bus.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.