Re: Oaf names & file structure

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com>]

Michael Meeks <michael helixcode com> writes:

> 
>         You object to me and Miguel doing the job ? I agree the foundation
> should own the namespaces ( if we can register them at all ), and deal  
> with any difficult situations, but I see this process as just a rubber
> stamping excercise mainly.
> 

It's possible that you and Miguel are the right people to administer
the namespace, but if so, that decision should be made by the board,
not you.

> 
>         I am basing my suggestions on my understanding of what happens in
> the Microsoft world. In this case every interface is named with a number,
> and AFAICS these same numbers are used to activate
> components; cf. CoCreateInstance / CoGetClassObject.

Microsoft has both unique interface IDs (which are called,
confusingly, IIDs) and unique implementation IDs (which are called
CLSIDs). Both are are actually UUIDs (also known as GUIDs).


>         Of course; I prefer a consistant scheme across interface naming
> and activation, so perhaps we should not bother with namespacing ( which
> seems contentious ), and go with naming all our interfaces with a uuid, 
> eg.

There's no need for interface names and implementation names to be
constructed in the same way.

>         IDL:7729c846-2f6c-4ebf-b36f-01de85ee2faf:1.0
> 
>         and having a load of defines around the place for these ?

This approach has many advantages, but I don't believe it's possible
to technically implement it right now, and there's no way to name IDL
interfaces so that they contain both a human-readable component and a
UUID component.


> > However, the portion before the colon is a free text string according
> > to the current recommended standard format for OAFIIDs, so you are
> > free to use this however you want. The UUID is not optional in the
> > recommendation.
> 
>         I see no need for the UUID at all; it is impossible to remember 
> and type in, and there is no need for it, unless that is you think people
> cannot be trusted to use their namespace wisely to create unique names ? I
> would far, far rather be able to have a memorable ID than some impossible 
> to remember number. [ it took me long enough to memorise my social
> security id ].

You shouldn't need to memorize it or remember it. You should #define
it once. Typing it in manually all the time would cause more errors
due to typos.

> > You could achieve the same thing solely with filenames. We don't split
> > /usr/bin into a complex multi-level directory tree and I see no
> > argument for doing it here.
> 
>         I am happy to do the work if that concerns you. 

I don't think there is time to add more features for GNOME 1.4. We can
reconsider for 2.0.

> As for /usr/bin not being namespaced; this is why we need the PATH
> variable, so StarOffice can be installed in /opt/Office, X in
> /usr/X11R6/bin etc. etc. and I would prefer not to have this.

We already have an OAF_INFO_PATH variable. It will be needed whether
or not we add more subdirectories.

> > However, we can't do any IDL renames for stable released modules until  
> > GNOME 2.0 (something I pointed out on the original renaming thread).   
> 
>         Ok; perhaps, it depends how much of a bug you see this as being; I
> tend to think it is quite a large bug, but I'm not very concerned about 
> the relatively minor cockups in the released modules.
>  

Maintaining the platform compatibility rules is more important than a
namespacing bug. As GNOME 1.4 release coordinator, I will not accept
releases of packages that violate the compatibility rules, short of a
vote of the Board.


Overall, though, the real thing that annoys me about this whole
discussion is that how IIDs are constructed, and how oafinfo files are
names and where they are installed is really a semi-arbitrary
decision, one that has already been made. It doesn't matter _that_
much either way, although you and I both have our preferences. But I
don't appreciate it having you question it regularly every few
months. Are you eager to have people whine about studlyCaps (another
semi-arbitrary decision that annoys a lot more people) every couple of
months?

 - Maciej