Re: Session saving & 2.26.0

[Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org>]

Le mercredi 25 mars 2009, à 09:47 -0400, Matthias Clasen a écrit :
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org> wrote:
> > We could say that it's useless to support cancelling both via the
> > inhibit dialog and via the clients interaction dialogs (this would of
> > course ignore the fact that we don't control if apps are displaying a
> > button to cancel logout -- ie, XSMP compatibility).
> 
> It is a big difference if you allow a user to cancel the logout or if
> you let a random misbehaving client block logout. If you read Jons
> design at http://live.gnome.org/SessionManagement/GnomeSession it has
> a single sentence that is marked in bold (presumably because it is an
> important part of the design):
> 
>     It should be stressed that, even when not forced, *clients should
> not assume that
>     they will have the ability to block logout or shutdown*.
> 
> You just broke this by giving clients that ability back.

"clients should not assume that they will have the ability..." is
different from "clients should assume they will not have the ability...".
I think this change is perfectly compatible with the design. And FWIW,
I'd also point out the design doesn't have to be set in stone forever if
we disagree with it.

Re the random misbehaving client blocking logout: first, I've yet to see
one. And you're basically proposing to review all working XSMP clients
to make sure they don't try to cancel logging out (because, well, if you
don't review them, you'll lose data by ignoring this flag they return)
instead of fixing the non-working XSMP clients. This is not how I think
things should be handled.

Vincent

-- 
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.