Proposed draft for the thumbnail D-Bus specification
kevin.krammer at gmx.at
Tue Sep 9 04:08:28 PDT 2008
On Tuesday 09 September 2008, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> I would perhaps accept an amendment to the specification mentioning the
> possibility of canceling *some* of the thumbnailers's tasks. Without any
> guarantees for success.
Right. IMHO you focus too much on a specific and very low level interpretation
In a lot of cases the cancel should just stop processing the queue as soon as
I am quite confident that nobody will assume "stop right after this machine
If one delegates processing to a service, cancelling is the method of
conveying that you are no longer interested in a result.
I don't think it depends on an implementation detail such as thread-based or
process-based to tell a worker to stop at the next checkpoint it reaches.
Just because it is technically possible to hard kill a process doesn't mean
will ever want to do that since one can easily create stale lock files, SHM
semaphores, etc. that way.
Since there is usually more than one way to implement a thumbnail algorithm,
having a spec with cancel capabilities gives hint to developers of such
implementations that they should probably think about where to put check
Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer
KDE user support, developer mentoring
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/attachments/20080909/5876e9dc/attachment.pgp
More information about the xdg