[Telepathy] Standardising Mission Control

[Robert McQueen]

Naba Kumar wrote:
> Speaking of gconf usage in mission-control, I have have been thinking 
> about implementing flexible accounts storage backends (like mentioned at 
> website). gconf would just be one of the many.
> 
> That's said, I tend to agree with Alberto that manipulating accounts via 
> dbus API sounds too far fetched to me. I think what we need is 
> sufficiently portable library that most mc/client implementations can 
> use directly (along with the desired storage backend), either directly 
> in case of compatible languages or via simple language bindings.

What?! So with flexible accounts storage backends, MC can store accounts
in different places, and the MC library which everyone is required to
bind / port / reimplement must also support all of these backends?
That's absurd. Why not just use a D-Bus API and MC can do whatever it
wants to store the accounts? The entire point of Telepathy being a D-Bus
is that we can decouple people from implementations and provide standard
APIs, so they don't *need* to bind or reimplement things.

> Thanks.

Regards,
Rob

> Regards,
> -Naba
> _______________________________________________
> Telepathy mailing list
> Telepathy at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/telepathy