Re: Bonobo::GenericFactory vs. GNOME::GenericFactory

[Elliot Lee <sopwith redhat com>]

On 16 May 2000, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

> Actually, it is not even gnome-specific really, so I would propose yet
> another module name. I suggested OAF::GenericFactory on IRC, but
> Miguel didn't like it because he doesn't think the factory interface
> has anything to do with activation. I disagree with him. Activation is
> the _only_ thing that uses the factory interface. Also, this interface
> was originally part of gnorba since it was activation-related; I think
> the same arguments apply to putting it in OAF. Basically I think
> renaming the interface in the first place was a mistake.

I think this all makes sense. However, OAF may not be the only activation
mechanism, so putting OAF in the interface name might not make sense. I
must apologize for not having a better name to suggest - maybe OAF is the
least-worst one available.

-- Elliot
"Moron of the week" for four years running