Re: more gnome 2 proposal

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

Alex Graveley <alex ximian com> writes:
> 
> 1) Oaf is the activation mechanism for bonobo, and iirc, maintainers of
> both bonobo and oaf have expressed interest in merging them. 
> 
> 2) The interface to gconf should be bonobo-conf.
> 
> 3) Although not brought up, the interface to gnome-vfs should also be
> bonobo/moniker-based.
> 
> I understand this is all very Blue Skyish, but when I said componentize
> to the core, I meant it.
> 

My suggestion on this has always been:

 - do a Bonobo-based wrapper implemented in terms of the C APIs, 
   since we have to keep supporting the C APIs in the short term
 - when everyone is pretty much using the wrapper, phase out 
   the C APIs

So if you approach it that way, I don't see how doing the Bonobo
interfaces affects the wrapped libraries or requires integration with
them. Also, the Bonobo interfaces can be on a different release
schedule from the wrapped libraries, if appropriate.

Havoc

_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers