Le mercredi 18 mai 2011 à 15:40 +0200, Michael Biebl a écrit : > Isn't that the kind of functionality that was supposed to be provided > in gnome-system-tools and system-tools-backend? What will happen with > g-s-t and s-t-b? > Why is it better to have that functionality in systemd itself instead of > g-s-t? As the maintainer of the (virtually dead) stb, I must say that standardizing all this configuration mess would really be a good thing. Have a look at the stb's code to understand how we badly need to get rid of special-casing all configuration items.
Improving the gst was very hard to do because the architecture had to be very generic, with every change requiring adapting each backend for every weird distribution with its peculiar commandline tools and different behaviors. Code is much cleaner when you know how the system works and don't need to abstract it too much. Anyway, the stb model is quite outdated now: network goes through NetworkManager, users via accountsservice, boot via systemd or Upstart specific tools. And the general architecture doesn't fit very nicely with time configuration. So better start again with something more specific, suited to GNOME's current needs (and not written in perl ;-). If something needs to work differently on different platforms, better define small D-Bus interfaces suited to each configuration area, and implement them separately for each platform, rather than mixing everything in a big and ugly set of scripts. Just my two cents Cheers _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list