Re: service stereotype thingies

[Torsten Schulz <Torsten Schulz germany sun com>]

>> BTW: We have several interfaces which deal with services, I 
>> think it would be stupid to change those (of cause they have "service" in 
>> their identifier) just because somebody does not like the name. If we 
>> merge BONOBO and OpenOffice API, we will have hard times to explain to 
>> those developers who have existing code on our API, anyway. I don't see 
>> any logical reason to make transition even harder.
>> 

> Since Sun asked the GNOME project to rename every method in our IDL, I
> do not have much sympathy. :-)

> (BTW I will do the same rename in OAF and with approval from the
> maintainer do the same for Nautilus if Miguel and Michael actually go
> through with it).

> I think you will have to break interfaces anyway, because in GNOME we
> cannot specify services at the IDL level, since that is not OMG IDL
> compliant.


  I agree with Maciej, that there is no need to hold on the term
'service' - if you will find any other more sensible - when adopting
parts of the service concept to oaf/Bonobo. I don't think the oaf/Bonobo
version will be exactly the same than the existing OpenOffice version.
That means, if OpenOffice will migrate to oaf/Bonobo, changes
(syntactical and semantical) have to be done anyway.

-- 
Best regards,
 Torsten                            mailto:Torsten Schulz germany sun com