Re: 2.4 Proposed Modules - nautilus-cd-burner and gnome-vfs funkines s



Murray Cumming Comneon com wrote:

So, there's a danger of another load thread here, but I can't help myself.
I'm sorry for the rambling nature of this email - it's because I see a
problem but not a solution:

I'm not happy with the way nautilus-cd-burner exposes the funky burn:///
gnome-vfs protocol/location, or with the strangeness of having a virtual
stuff-that-I-might-burn-soon location via the file manager.
[snip interesting comments]

I think the major reason for the proliferation of URI schemes is because that is how gnome-vfs is structured. You write a gnome-vfs module, and it handles a virtual file system under a given URI scheme.

There isn't really any way for one vfs module to easily delegate control of a subtree to another module without a fair bit of work. If gnome-vfs had facilities for setting up these sort of "mount points", then people would probably use them.

I don't think people are going round creating new URI schemes for the hell of it. I also don't think they are doing it to piss off Daniel. But in the current framework, that is the direction they are pushed.

James.

--
Email: james daa com au
WWW:   http://www.daa.com.au/~james/






[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]