Re: New modules in 2.14

[Richard Hughes <hughsient gmail com>]

On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 19:26 +0800, James Henstridge wrote:
> >There's just a lot of corner cases and I do think these justify g-p-m if
> >we want the right user experience. All this is about policy and thus
> >don't belong in HAL. Btw, is it now more clear that we need the policy
> >piece in the desktop session and not on a system-level?
> >  
> >
> Okay, it does sound like some per-user program is necessary to handle
> these parts of the power management system.  The fact that the g-p-m
> contains special knowledge of gnome-screensaver still seems a weird way
> of doing things, and won't scale as more apps become aware of power
> management events.

Ohh yes, there is talk of g-p-m having a session DBUS interface for
programs to register for, like gnome-screensaver and Network Manager. At
the moment, you are right, and these are hardcoded.

> As an example, say the Totem developers decide it would be nice to
> disable the video pipeline when the laptop's lid is closed to conserve
> power.  It would be much easier to do this by making totem listen for a
> broadcast, rather than modifying g-p-m to send a special notification to
> Totem.

Ohh yes, I totally agree. We've got bugs open trying to hash out the
details, and we're actively working on the issues at the moment.

Richard.