Re: new module proposal: brasero

Le lundi 03 novembre 2008 à 23:48 +0100, Luca Ferretti a écrit :
> IMHO if we really want a "burning workflow" in GNOME, we need to define
> two components:
>      1. a "frontend" to add content and adjust the layout 
>      2. a "backend" to create the ISO and/or physically move the data on
>         discs

Right. And we already have a backend, this is libnautilus-burn. It might
need to be extended, but I don’t see a need to replace it entirely.

> Examples of frontends are Rhythmbox playlists, burn:// location in
> Nautilus, Brasero main window, i.e. anything will allow you to collect
> and organize stuff you want to copy on disks.


> Examples of backends are nautilus-cd-burner and brasero :-) OK, serious.
> >From UI point of view, backend is the the dialog showing you the
> progress of burning process, a software between the frontend and
> cd*tools.

Yes. There are two separate things here: a real burning backend (which
currently is cdrtools/cdrkit and in the end should probably be libburn)
and a base UI.

> Now, the question is: how many changes do we need in Brasero and other
> applications/libraries to achieve the goal of a flexible burning
> framework for GNOME?

IMO the quickest way is to extend n-c-b to add the features it is

> Sparse Notes:
>       * IMHO currently brasero (as "backend") is better then n-c-b, at
>         least 'cause brasero provides multisession and
>         blanking/formatting

AFAIK n-c-b provides blanking. I should add here that brasero seems to
have some stability issues (but it is something that should go away with

>       * About the "frontend" I think could be good put burn:// location
>         and brasero side by side in the desktop, having a simple
>         Nautilus add-in to quickly burn stuff as well as a full featured
>         (but not bloated) application

What exactly can the brasero front-end do that n-c-b cannot? Shouldn’t
it be something that we could add to the n-c-b burn dialog?

>       * really, can we define a default GNOME burning backend without
>         hardconding a command or depending on some library? Any DBUS
>         magic?

I don’t think using a library is a problem here. There is no need to
move the backend to a separate process using DBUS, only a need to
abstract it from the application.

: :' :      We are Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `'       We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
  `-        our own. Resistance is futile.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

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