Re: gnome-screensaver: Up for grabs?

[Ikey Doherty <michael i doherty intel com>]

On 21/07/16 14:12, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> Hi;
>
> On 21 July 2016 at 13:42, Ikey Doherty <michael i doherty intel com>
wrote:
> > So Jeremy Bicha kindly contacted me the other day to express concern
> > with Budgie/GNOME Screensaver. I had been toying with the notion of
> > forking GNOME Screensaver due to its deadness, and making it work
> > better for Budgie/Modern GNOME integration.
> >
> > Jeremy correctly pointed out it might be worth maintaining the
> > project instead, which I'm up for.
>
> AFAIR, gnome-screensaver is part of the "Flashback" session:

Interesting, wasn't aware, thanks.
> https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/GnomeFlashback
>
> given that it uses Metacity.
>
> > So - assuming its up for grabs, I'd have a couple of things I'd
> > like to do immediately to it:
> >
> >  - Enforce my own coding style (Sorry, I use .clang-format as part
> > of my CI processes)
>
> Changing the coding style is usually a good way to break the history
> of a project, and `git blame` alongside with it. It usually is up to
> the maintainer to decide the coding style, but for established
> projects — even unmaintained ones — history is probably more relevant
> than coding style.

This is true, however the coding style of gnome-software really could do
with being updated. I know the issue with upsetting git blame, however
there are certain no-nos I have when writing anything. That includes
curly braces in all cases, even for single-line if statements, just
for sanity/security. Plus the coding style is that of C89.

> >  - Run it via various static analysis tools as part of the cleanup
>
> Don't see anything wrong with this.
>
> >  - Enforce C99 (Ideally I'd like C11 but I don't know if GNOME will
> > permit this? Would be an interesting discussion)
>
> GNOME, as a project, does not mandate a C standard. There are some
> projects that wish to still support compilers that do not wholly
> support the C99 or C11 standards — like MSVC. Considering that
> gnome-screensaver is an X11-only project that has no portability
> outside of Linux and Unix-y OSes, it probably only needs to care about
> GCC and Clang.

This is kinda what I was thinking, but needed clarification in general,
thanks.

> >  - Enhance theme-a-bility
> >  - Permit RGBA on top level components (not wallpaper) and update the
> >    UI style, to enable proper theming (I need this for Budgie
> > integration). Essentially this would revert locking the UI to the old
> > GNOME Shell styling
>
> Styling via CSS is likely safer than loading C modules that may or may
> not compromise the integrity of the locking screen. I'm not entirely
> sure what "themability" means in this context, though.

Themability, CSS :) As you've indicated, I'd far rather this approach
then to dlopen.

> > So with those points in mind, is it up for grabs, would you want me
> > grabbing it, and are my points acceptable? :)
>
> You probably want to talk to the maintainers of the Flashback session,
> to ensure that you're not breaking their expectations; other than
> that, gnome-screensaver is essentially not part of the GNOME session,
> so it's entirely up to you to decide the direction of the project, if
> you wish to own it.
>
> Ciao,
>  Emmanuele.

OK that's cool, and yeah I'll try liasing with them to get their
thoughts on it.

Cheers,

- ikey