Re: Plans for gnome-vfs replacement


On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 13:15 +0200, Benedikt Meurer wrote:

> > We still need to support URIs too at least in some places, because of
> > '%u' in .desktop files. If GNOME apps switched to using '%f', then
> > konqueror (and old versions of GNOME) wouldn't be able to pass remote
> > files to them any more. Likewise, if nautilus/libgnomedesktop didn't
> > support using URIs for remote files any more, then they wouldn't be able
> > to pass remote files to KDE apps.
> I think URI should still be used to refer to resources "from outside"
> and to contact the appropriate backends. But internally GFile or
> GFilePath objects should be used. That is, the user types in an URI, the
> library resolves the URI to a GFile and passes a serialized form of the
> GFile to the daemon.

I remember asking in 2000 why gnome-vfs did not use GnomeVFSUri in the
API rather than raw uris but I cannot remember what the answer was. Does
anyone know the rationale behind not using a more abstract structure for
uris in gnome-vfs ?

The only reason I can imagine would be related to the "round-trip"
preserving property.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]