Re: gvfs gdbus port and the future of HAL

[Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>]

On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 15:17 +0200, Tomas Bzatek wrote:
> Good Friday afternoon,
> 
> so I've been working on GDBus port, the code lies in the 'gdbus' branch.
> So far only the proxy volume monitor is done and working, making afc,
> gdu and gphoto2 volume monitors automatically using the new
> infrastructure. Still fixing few leftovers but the code generally works.
> I've also made slight changes to the d-bus interface but since it always
> been private, it's not a problem.
> 
> 
> Bigger problem is HAL, I need your opinion. Here's my proposal:
> 
> 1. nuke the hal volume monitor - on Linux it's no big deal but other
> platforms would suffer (remember the systemd flame on d-d-l and question
> about officially supported platforms). Though I guess udisks is probably
> going to be available soon on BSDs.
> 
> 2. remove hal-specific code from gphoto2 volume monitor - gudev takes
> priority when available and I suppose it maintains full feature set -
> David, could you please confirm? Also in this case, see my concern above
> about non-Linux platforms.
> 
> Both components are still using libdbus and porting them makes no sense.
> 
> 
> Once the volume monitor part is tested/reviewed, I'd like to merge it to
> master to get it into 1.10/3.2 release. I'm going to look at porting
> core gvfs daemon now.

My take on this is to remove the HAL specific code from the gphoto2
volume monitor, and not port (but leave the code) for HAL there. If
somebody wants to port it, they'll do it. Otherwise it'll just bitrot,
and remove it when you've had enough of waiting.

It leaves the opportunity to people who care about HAL to either do the
work, or finish up their udisks ports.

Cheers