Re: My vision of gnome-libs (was Re: GNOME 2.0 meeting summary)

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com> writes: 
> Ah, now if only you felt the same way about gnome-vfs or bonobo. :-)
> To some of us, an app that only works on the local file system is as
> much of a bug as one that uses gnome-config.

I do feel that way, if you are just saying take current widgets and
add VFS support (or whatever you want to do with Bonobo, I don't see
how you would "Bonobofy" stuff already in gnome-libs?). If you're
saying take current widgets and do a total rewrite or API redesign, I
think that should be done by keeping the as-is widgets, and adding new
widgets that are designed for e.g. async operation.

> However, in the case of gnome-vfs it seems fairly sensible to me to
> have a new vfs-widgets module that includes gnome-vfs-enhanced
> versions of existing widgets, or entirely new ones, since it could be
> a long term project. The ones in libgnomeui can be deprecated whenever
> the new ones are ready to be part of the platform.

Right. The question is exactly that, does "VFS support" mean rewriting
everything, or just changing some readdir() to VFS calls? i.e. is "VFS
support" a new feature or basically a bug fix?

For Bonobo, again I don't know what you mean by that, other than
"include Bonobo libs in the platform" which of course we should do.

Havoc