Re: gnome-screensaver: Up for grabs?

On 21/07/16 14:27, Bastien Nocera wrote:
On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 14:12 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:

On 21 July 2016 at 13:42, Ikey Doherty <michael i doherty intel com>
So Jeremy Bicha kindly contacted me the other day to express
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:

given that it uses Metacity.

I don't know how well that works, or whether they've replaced gnome-
screensaver and gnome-settings-daemon yet. I refused to add hacks to
gnome-settings-daemon to make it work under GNOME Flashback as there
were just too many things that wouldn't work properly with it.

FWIW in Budgie we added a "Shell Shim" D-BUS API in budgie-wm, the
Mutter wrapper, to implement that compatability, and proxy some calls
back to the panel manager, i.e. for GTK+ ops, such as the EndSessionDialog.

I think a fork/rename would be the best option to avoid confusion in
the bug tracker. Given the number of time I have to reassign bugs about
the desktop file manager window to nautilus from gnome-desktop, it
would probably be best if bugs weren't stuck there.

OK so if the Flashback guys aren't interested in GNOME Screensaver
longevity (Given the aims _do_ include modernisation on my end, which
might conflict with Flashback goals) then what's the best course?

Ideally I want to get this thing cleaned up so we can avoid more dead
forks like light-locker and the likes. Fundamental selfish aim for
me is of course Budgie interoptability (Which will serve us until Budgie
12, when we're Wayland, but it would continue to be maintained)

- ikey

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