Re: gvfs basic testing

[Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com>]

On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 18:52 -0500, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 17:05 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
> 
> > You should be aware that GVfs does not yet support out-of-tree backends
> > (that's one reason there's no development or files or documentation
> > installed as part of 'make install'). In other words, assume that the
> > protocol between the gvfs daemon and the mount daemon can _and_ will
> > change maybe even in minor releases. Backends in the tree are fine, if
> > we make a protocol change or whatever, we just fix up all the backends.
> > 
> > At some point I _think_ [1] we want to provide a stable ABI, however at
> > this point I'm pretty sure we're not ready to make such a commitment.
> > 
> > [1] : but of course it's up to Alex if he wants to provide a stable ABI.
> > Just FWIW, I'd be 100% supportive if Alex don't want to provide one;
> > maintaining an ABI really sucks.
> 
> Agreed; but on the other hand, I've seen several requests for
> out-of-tree backend support. If Alex chooses to not support that, we
> should be prepared to either let some backends that we'd usually
> consider "oddball" into the main tree, or deal with bug reports stemming
> from downstream's patched-in backends.

I do in fact think that we should support out of tree backends
eventually, but as david says, we're just not ready for that yet. We
need more time to mature the code, and then we need a push to clean up
the interfaces and stuff so that the APIs are supportable longtime.