[Telepathy] Standardising Mission Control
mardy at users.sourceforge.net
Thu May 10 03:31:23 PDT 2007
ext Alp Toker wrote:
> Some possible desirables:
> * Client/service separation: Allow for lightweight client
> implementations by doing as much work as possible in the service.
> This would mean having D-Bus API not only for for accessing
> accounts but also for manipulating account details.
I take for granted that we all agree on gconf being the place where to
store account data (if not, step forward!). Under this condition, I
don't see any benefit in having a DBus API for managing accounts;
speaking of the package I know (mission-control), most of the API
required to manage account are not much more than simple setters and
getters of gconf data; the only exceptions might be the account creation
/deletion functions, which are doing some work more.
I'm afraid that a DBus API would just be one level of indirection more,
and have the only effects of slowing down things.
BTW, I'm not strictly against the idea of introducing it -- but I would
see as an addition, not as a replacement of what is already in
> * Standardise the account store format to ease migration between
> desktop environments and possibly even mobile devices.
> * Avoid monolithic interfaces in favour of smaller ones that deal
> with individual roles eg. account management, unified contacts,
> unified presence. Implementations with specific needs can then
> concentrate on the features they need to support.
I guess that here with "interfaces" you are still referring to DBus
interfaces. What we have now in mission-control is only "unified
presence"; contacts and account management are left out. About the
latter, as I just wrote I don't have a strong opinion in favor of it,
while about contacts I am too biased by Nokia's eds-sync to come out
with any different idea. :-)
http://www.mardy.it <-- Geek in un lingua international!
More information about the Telepathy