Re: The storage interface cleanup

[Dietmar Maurer <dietmar maurer-it com>]

Miguel de Icaza wrote:

> It seems like a lot of pain inflicted on everyone for the sake of
> a few changes to Nautilus as Dietmar pointed out.

I think there is a broad consensus that we need to change the
Storage interface, and eazel have to cope with that since
they are using a library (bonobo) that is not even released. Besides,
none of the eazel people denied that it is not much work to
make the changes.

So please let me make the changes. They are necessary and it
is less work to make them now.

- Dietmar

> > We could require revving both components and applications at the Gnome 2.0
> > time frame. I understand you don't *want* to do that, but I haven't heard
> > any specific reasons why it's such a terrible idea.
>
> Because it is lame.  I had hoped you could figure why this is lame,
> but I will explain:
>
>         * Because not every component might transition to supporting
>           the two interfaces at the same time.
>
>         * Because I will hate to tell people `we have a kickass
>           component architecture', `oh, and btw, and you have to
>           implement streams twice, and storages twice, but never mind
>           that'.  Which just sounds retarded.
>
>         * Because of each of the 4 possible combinations that
>           components might support, half of it is a losing
>           combination.
>
>         * Because we can not have a UNIX component architecture if
>           every application is going to have a different set of
>           interfaces it will support.