Re: GNOME Power Manager

[Davyd Madeley <davyd madeley id au>]

On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 10:01 -0600, Elijah Newren wrote:

> I didn't forget it; I was only responding to the linux-2.4 part of the
> thread.  I think the alternative OS side of things has already been
> addressed sufficiently[1,2,3,4,5], and given that we have other HAL
> dependencies in the desktop, I'm honestly quite surprised that anyone
> thinks that this should hold back the inclusion of g-p-m.  In fact, I
> really doubt anyone does -- I personally don't see how the argument
> makes any sense and I'm guessing that it's merely being used as an
> excuse by those who don't like the notification-area thing.  ;-)  And
> while I can feel some sympathy for the notification-area thing, no one
> is trying to provide any solutions to the reasons why it is being used
> and I personally don't see why this should hold back g-p-m's
> inclusion.  But, as always, that's just my $0.02 and wild guesses.  :)

I am not opposing g-p-m. Most of the problems that it has had have been
addressed or are being addressed. I was simply pointing out that we
should not break our current level of service for non-HAL-enabled
patrons.

I have suggested a solution for fixing the notification-area abuse,
which will avoid putting a timeline on fixing panel and will still be
quite useful when panel is fixed :)

--d

-- 
Davyd Madeley

http://www.davyd.id.au/
08B0 341A 0B9B 08BB 2118  C060 2EDD BB4F 5191 6CDA