Re: [Evolution] text-mode shell anyone?

[Not Zed <notzed ximian com>]

On Wed, 2002-07-10 at 10:34, Jim Meyer wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-07-09 at 14:46, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> > well, bonobo wouldn't completely go away - it'd still be used for
> > loading abiword into the view-pane for example and all that fun stuff.
> >
> > But the talk is about making evolution a single monolithic app rather
> > than a tightly coupled componentised *thing*.
>
> Hmmm. Shared libs that one could compile other code to use, at least?

You'd hope so ... reusable and well documented components, which just
happen to run in the same address space and use normal c calling
conventions for their linkage.

But considering the design didn't get anywhere near a clean component
division when the calling conventions were 1. a lot of work to write,
and 2. very slow, i can't imagine the situation getting much better when
the calling conventions are trivial and fast.  There's always too much
in the way of 'just add this 1 function for this 1 feature' and never
going back to fix it when that 1 feature is now 10.

And we're still going to have to come up with some middleware
replacement for the features we did use, i hope whomever does that
doesn't make the same mistakes.

Of course, the other problem is that if you do this, then you start to
have locking/synchronisation issues with having multiple apps using the
same libraries at the same time.  So certain things (e.g. config/data
storage) need to be behind process barriers or other sequential
enforcement mechanisms, for which CORBA is infact, a fair solution
(sigh, if only orbit was better at it and the c corba bindings didn't
suck so much).