org.freedesktop.PowerManagement

[Richard Hughes]

On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 11:31 +0200, Holger Macht wrote:
> On Thu 29. Mar - 23:43:22, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 00:38 +0200, Holger Macht wrote:
> > > 
> > > Simply speaking, for me, Shutdown() involves two
> > > basic tasks. o.f.Desktop.Session.Save() and o.f.Hal.Shutdown().
> > > Suspend() doesn't include either of the two.
> > 
> > Yes, I agree. But we don't have o.f.Desktop.Session.Save right now, and
> > probably won't for quite a while yet.
> 
> Why not? That should be the aim and the desktop people should get their
> ass up ;-)
> 
> Specs should be defined from the bottom to the top IMHO. Get a standard
> general desktop interface and build the pm interface above it.

Sure, it's okay to put this in a desktop API, but then we have to
duplicate the Inhibit stuff and provide some complex interaction.

> > I'll do you a deal. I'll deprecate Shutdown() when we have a o.f.Desktop
> > spec implemented by at least one desktop. ;-)
> 
> What consumers do you actually have for your Shutdown() method in
> gnome-power-manager right now?

That's a good point; not many.

- [x] shutdown the computer when finished converting
- The logout dialogue
- Any random desktop shortcut icon
- The GDM login screen

> So if you like to have a spec as fast as possible, go for it, but you
> won't get my agreement because it will create more problems in the long
> run as it will solve.

What about inhibit? We can do some cool integration stuff just by
keeping this on the same service.

Also, think twm. We now are asking them to add *two* interfaces into the
desktop base install. It's much simpler for them to install a shortcut
setuid to call /sbin/shutdown. Ick.

> I really appreciate the whole approach and the other interfaces, though.

Cheers for your feedback!

Richard.