On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 6:17 PM, David Zeuthen<da...@fubar.dk> wrote: > >> If you guys working on DeviceKit-* are willing to have different >> backends, then that sounds fine. It's not a complete answer, but it >> fills in the massive gap that removing HAL left. If not, then we have >> to think about the story GNOME is going to tell here. > > We might but it's a lot of work. It is probably worth it.
I think that's what the people involved in this thread want basically is just some guidance, i.e. a yes or no here. > [lots of case by case examples] I agree with this. > So all in all, this is basically proposing shifting more responsibility > to the OS vendor. e.g. it would make it more difficult to get GNOME > working out of the box unless you are willing to ship the latest bits. > I, for one, think that is a *good* thing. Either you swim or you sink. I agree here too, just with the caveat that it is probably a good idea if we accept it as a bug if the desktop core (i.e. gnome-session+beyond) totally falls apart if you don't have one of the DeviceKit-* running. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
