Re: Interoperability of GCM?

[Richard Hughes <hughsient gmail com>]

On 27 May 2010 10:35, Milan Knížek <knizek confy volny cz> wrote:
> On many other forums, there is a lot of flame wars about
> KDE/GNOME/whatever by both users and developers and hence I assume that
> proposing to digiKam developers to add a DBus interface to a GNOME
> application could result in unnecessary refusal or at least a heated
> discussion.

Sure. I'm not that bothered about the name of the interface I'm using.
I'm not sure making the dbus interface org.hughsie.ColorManager is any
more cross desktop than org.gnome.ColorManager -- but I do understand
the perception.

> I assume that a politically feasible way for digiKam would be to have a
> KDE GUI (equivalent to GCM GUI) above the core access objects, and
> org.gnome.SomeThing might make it a bit more difficult.

Yes. Ideally KDE could do a simple KCM which also wrote to
~/.config/device-profiles.conf and also provided the same interface.
Note: If this was a viable option, I would have no hesitation to
changing the DBus name to something non-gnome and working the KDE guys
to get something working.

> Anyway, I guess we (users) will have to wait some time until it gets
> standardised and things will then settle themselves. The worst solution
> would be to have GCM and "KCM" running at the same moment and fighting
> for screen calibration...

Sure. GCM or the mythical KCM would only be started by the correct
desktop, and if they share a same name, then the correct one would be
autostarted at session login.

Note, a simple KCM would probably only take a few days worth of
programming to put together.

Richard.