Re: Gnome Session Services Framework

[Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>]

On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 11:59 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 13:32 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 19:05 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> > > 
> > > While I don't see this being included with the next GNOME 2.12 release
> > > many people have been asking for these features and I think it is time
> > > we consider fixing up the gnome-session patch to make it conditionally
> > > compilable and get people playing with it.  I think the lead time needed
> > > to fix up all the issues is not that long and distros can start to
> > > include at least the wrapper part in the near future and then eventually
> > > get it proposed for 2.14.
> > > 
> > how would we include the wrapper program without having the
> > gnome-session part of it for 2.12?
> 
> If you can get the patch ready and people are willing to accept it then
> be my guest but I don't think it is going to be ready for 2.12 (either
> part).  I think you underestimate the work needed to get a proper
> implementation going.
>
what is missing then in libgnomeservice/gnome-session? I'm not saying
it's perfect, but that as a simple autostart system, with all the
testing we can get if we have it in HEAD, it should work, at least the
same way current gnome-session works, without having all the services
hard coded.

>   This does not stop distros from shipping it and
> as I said, not sure about your guys schedule but I think at least with
> respect Fedora, that will give us enough lead time to include it.  2.12
> freeze is coming up soon isn't it?  
> 
next week AFAIK

> > > 
> > > Anything else?
> > > 
> > from all my tests, this is, IMO, ready to be tested for 2.12. So, I
> > would suggest we add the gnome-session conditionally compiled code (once
> > I finish it), make that the default so that we force people to test it,
> > and if big errors are found, come back to the old gnome-session thing by
> > default.
> 
> If you believe so and the maintainers believe so than go ahead but I
> rather stay cautious at this stage of the game.
>
yes, me too, that's why I think the 2 months of testing we can have
before 2.12 is enough to either find big errors (and thus come back to
the old code) or just ship it with 2.12.

>   I don't think there is
> any harm leaving it off for a release giving us more time to polish it
> off.
>
no, of course, no harm, although as I said, it's ready for testing and
for simple service autostarting tasks. I'm using it myself for a few
days now, with no real problems.
-- 
Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>