Le jeu 17/04/2003 à 00:26, Ken Deeter a écrit : > > Apart from the "store in gconf keys" part, and if you replace "smb > > method" by "gnome-vfs methods", that's a good idea ;) > > > > why not gconf keys? Because gconf is meant to store configuration data, not arbitrary information. And I think it would be nice to be able to store all passwords in a file which would be encrypted with a master password or stuff like that > > Why do we want to do this at the application level? It seems like an app > shouldn't have to care about whether its getting a file from the local > system or a remote system.. so it should just be able to say: The main users of the daemon would be the gnome-vfs modules, so this would be hidden from most apps (but apps like galeon who doesn't use gnome-vfs should still have the opportunity to use it if they want to). > I also wonder why the authentication is done through a call back.. or i > guess it seems there should be a default call back already that > implements a password dialog so that every app doesn't have to write > one. > What would you suggest instead of a callback ? gnome-vfs isn't linked to any gui library, and that allows app to do whatever they want to get a password. For your default callback idea, see http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103408 (which I need to bring up on desktop-devel to try to get that in for gnome 2.4) With respect to the thread-unsafety of ORBit2, Michael Meeks told me recently that things should be much better now, I should retry my daemon to see how it works. Hope that helps, Christophe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=