Re: Oaf IDL re-structuring ...

[Michael Meeks <michael helixcode com>]

Hi Elliot,

On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Elliot Lee wrote:
> The theory:
>       The idea of a generic factory is part of OAF more than part of
> Bonobo. Lots of programs are going to want to do something like
> BonoboGenericFactory that don't necessarily use Bonobo.

        Whatever; I don't care, I don't think we should focus on 
encouraging people to use Bonobo rather than Oaf by itself
personaly. Either way, Oaf is very much a part of the Gnome component
model.

> BonoboGenericFactory has some things that are Bonobo-specific that it
> wouldn't be nice to remove.
  
        Such as ?

> I propose:
>       Renaming GNOME_ObjectFactory to OAF_ObjectFactory (just because
>       it is bad taste to define stuff in the GNOME namespace from
>       something that is non-GNOME, strictly speaking).
 
        This really doesn't help us achieve name space cleanliness at
all. I think we should get it inside either GNOME/ or Bonobo/.

>       For GNOME 2, implementing an OafGenericFactory GObject, and
>       having BonoboGenericFactory inherit from it.
  
        What will BonoboGenericFactory add ?

        Regards,
  
                Michael.

-- 
 mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot