Re: gnome-session proposal

[Frederic Peters <fpeters 0d be>]

Thanks for your email, I just asked yesterday morning Vincent about
the status of the dbus-based branch and this answers my questions.

William Jon McCann wrote:

> I agree with that.  Logout handling is broken too.  The XSMP protocol
> not only allows applications to be notified on logout (aka shutdown)
> but also allows any registered application to block logout altogether.
>  Windows XP used a similar approach.  However, in Windows Vista they
> rejected that model and proposed a much better one:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms700677(VS.85).aspx

You should not forget we are on much different grounds: they were
abused by applications and had to stop them blocking things; that
situation can be handled differently with free software, those
applications can just be fixed.  (also I believe there are less
abusive application developers in the free software development world.)


> Blocking shutdown is not only the wrong solution but it is also an
> incomplete one.  One of the primary use cases here is burning a CD.
> In the near future, switching users will also cause a CD burn to fail.

Why would switching user cause a CD burn to fail?  I was used to start
a CD burn then to fast-user-switch and hand over the computer to a
roommate.


> What do you think?

Nice work!

I am also interested in your clarification to Callum (will XSMP
support still be there for legacy applications) ?  and what about KDE,
do they have similar thoughts about the session process ?



        Frederic