Re: [gnome-network]GTransferManager Architecture

[Rodney Dawes <dobey free fr>]

Il ven, 2003-09-26 alle 08:06, Manuel Clos ha scritto:
> Rodney Dawes wrote:
>  > the notification area interaction, popping up a file-selector if need
>  > be, authentication dialogs, and similar other minor GUI tasks.
> 
> Is the user logged into the same machine from different displays? (a)
> or is the user logged from different machines but sharing the home dir 
> via NFS? (b)
> 
> What case are you refering to?

What is the difference between the two? Any local config/data file
access is going to have to be locked. The best way to do this, is
to have only one thing accessing the files we need. It's also very
easy to just use the machine information as part of the filename to
avoid conflicts from multiple machines accessing an nfs/etc... mounted
home directory, also.

> Also, how do you see it working? I think that in the first case the user 
> should see the same list of downloads, I'm not sure about the second.


> Also, the middleman should ask for interaction in all the displays, 
> don't you think so? This way the user can type the password (...) don't 
> matters the display he is using at the moment.

No. It should pop up on the display where the transfer was initiated.
The amount of time between when the user asks for a transfer to occur,
and the dialog gets popped up to ask for a password or anything (if it
does, ever), is going to be minimal.

> > What do people think about this?
> > 
> >             +--> DISPLAY=:0.0 manager <--> DISPLAY=:0.0 front-end
> > back-end <--+
> >             +--> DISPLAY=:1.0 manager <--> DISPLAY=:1.0 front-end
> 
> Are you refering to the "a" or "b" case?
> 
> The graphic seems to make sense in the "a" case.

The cases of multiple login are indifferent to me. We need to handle
them all. If the logins are on different machines, clearly there are
going to be different daemons running.

>   > This is basically how the interaction would probably go, between the
> > different processes. I'd like to get any potentially useful feedback,
> > before fully implementing all of this. So, let's have it. :)
> 
> Yeah, really the daemon shouldn't be running more than once, and then 
> one manager per display, each manager being a client doing the bits you 
> tell:
>  > the notification area interaction, popping up a file-selector if need
>  > be, authentication dialogs, and similar other minor GUI tasks.
> 
> I don't understand what front-end means here? does it mean other 
> clients? or the GUI for the manager?

It means the window with a GtkTreeView that shows you the list of
downloads. Or it means the web browser where you ask it to download
a file.

> I think other clients should talk to the daemon directly (trough the 
> lib, of course). Do you think of any reason they shouldn't do it 
> directly and do the communication through the manager?

So we can more easily maintain a consistent interface for progress
dialogs, authentication dialogs, and other aspects of the UI, and not
require all the clients to do a bunch of extra bonobo stuff to know
that a password is being requested, or the download is 80% complete.

-- dobey