Re: DESKTOP_STARTUP_TIMESTAMP proposal (application-startup-notification-forwarding)

[Elijah Newren <newren gmail com>]

On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 16:35:39 +0200, Lubos Lunak <l lunak suse cz> wrote:

>  No, they won't. The timestamp should be used only as long as the startup
> notification is still active. As soon as the applications says it's done
> finishing, the ID becomes invalid. In fact I think your extra environment
> variable is more vulnerable to this kind of problem, because there's no such
> timeout or similar if an application doesn't unset it and it gets propagated.
> 
>  So, in case you don't see any other problem with this, I'll commit this
> change, ok ?

Go for it.  :-)

> > Perhaps it should be explicitly mentioned in the spec that timeouts
> > are allowed (and needed) for the clueless people like me that wouldn't
> > find that obvious?
> 
>  Better now (attachment) ?

Yes, thanks.  Since Havoc's fine with it, go ahead and commit.  :-)

>  No problem. Specs are supposed to be complicated and not understandable,
> otherwise people wouldn't find them worth using ;)).

Haha, I think that needs to be a bugzilla quip or something...


Cheers,
Elijah