Re: location management vs. session management

[Glynn Foster <glynn foster sun com>]

Heya,

Okay...I agree that we must go with the session manager for some
things....but after that I'm open to suggestions...

Seemingly the location manager is really just a GUI that uses the 
archiver backend. Since we have a chooser GUI in gdm, does it make
sense to drop the location manager GUI and have the archiver stuff
[with associated rollbacks, rollforwards] being per-session, where
gnome-session defines the session ie. through the sm-clientID? 

But then I guess we need some sort of GUI for the rollback stuff...
Man, this sucks ;) 

Another thing, when you want to base a new session of a pre-existing
one, you need to propagate the save_yourself call to the apps 
[which is done already] but that save_yourself must propagate to the
apps config...and that means interaction between bonobo-conf and SM.

Have fun :)

/me runs away to deepest, darkest Peru

				See ya,
					Glynn ;)

Havoc Pennington wrote:
> 
> Multi-session only provides feature 1, right, not the other two.
> 
> Let me toss out this idea: if there are no advantages to the archiver
> for 1, I think we should use the multi-session for that. Because the
> SM spec also allows saving window sizes, positions, etc. in addition
> to app config (and this has to be done by the window manager, we can't
> store it in apps).  Also, the SM spec is cross-desktop and
> cross-app. e.g. I'm trying to get it supported in Mozilla, because
> Sawfish's incorrect placement of Mozilla drives me crazy. ;-)
> 
> Of course a specific app, such as a control panel, could use
> bonobo-conf to store the per-session data, etc.
> 
> If that sounds OK, the remaining question would be, how do features 2
> and 3 work in a multi-session world. That is, is the undo list
> per-session?
> 
> I guess 3 can't have a relation to multisession, since it's for system
> settings and sessions are per-user.
> 
> I really think the resulting UI will be scary if we have both
> multi-session and the separate location management concept, unless we
> can think of some logical interaction, so I think this is a pretty
> important issue to resolve. How do you think we should approach it?
> 
> Havoc