----- Original Message -----
> 
> 
> On 18.06.2015 13:14, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> On 12.06.2015 19:00, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 11:53:32AM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
> >>>> Yeah, we did.  From my recollection, most of that focused on the unbound
> >>>> parts and how NM could add the dns=unbound stuff (which Pavel
> >>>> contributed) but less on the NM connectivity checking, becuase Fedora
> >>>> hadn't turned that on by default yet.  I'm all fine with dns=unbound,
> >>>> that's not the issue.  The issue is more around what happens with NM's
> >>>> connectivity checking, since that's used by quite a few clients,
> >>>> including GNOME Shell.
> >>>
> >>> I personally find the anchor icon very confusing. As a non-expert in
> >>> this area, it doesn't represent anything which seems relevant to me,
> >>> and all of the right click menu options, once I figured out to right
> >>> click, are obscure to me.
> >>
> >> I plan to contact the GNOME folks about how they would be willing to
> >> better integrate the panel (most probably in a different form) into GNOME.
> > 
> > I don't think we want to integrate one more panel applet. The information
> > about
> > the DNS security should be passed on from NetworkManager. Once that's
> > figured
> > out, we can discuss how to show that information.
> 
> I think you should discuss with us the approach before saying that you
> don't want to integrate with dnssec-trigger.

We wouldn't want to integrate with "another" network handler. 

> We don't see any reason why
> the information should be passed back to NM. The information can be
> passed or gathered from dnssec-trigger itself. We don't want to lock
> ourselves only to NetworkManager, since there are also other network
> configuration managers.

That's fine. But you'll need to do the integration in NM, so that gnome-shell,
gnome-control-center and others NM front-ends can get the feature without
needing to talk directly to dnssec-trigger in addition to talking to 
NetworkManager.

You don't need to "lock yourselves into NetworkManager", but front-ends already
talking to NetworkManager should be getting the information through it, not
through another service and arbitrate themselves.

> > The code needs to integrate with various NetworkManager features, such as
> > VPNs and connectivity checking. Adding any UI for network information
> > provided
> > via a side-channel would be premature.
> 
> VPNs... done like 2 years ago. From what we discussed the connectivity
> checking is not really perfect in NM, since it assumes that DHCP
> provided resolvers are in resolv.conf because NM obviously uses system's
> stub resolver.
> 
> If there are any valid integration pieces, please be specific.

I don't want, in the Network panel, to be talking to 2 pieces of software that
I'll need to aggregate myself to get a complete picture.

I can imagine that gnome-shell developers will have a similar request.

> I would love to see more will for cooperation from GNOME people, so we
> can converge to the working and well integrated solution. Vague claims
> that something is missing or something needs to be done, without clear
> reasoning is not helping anyone.

It's a network feature, it needs to be integrated in NetworkManager for
WorkStation to be able to configure it, and get status from it.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Reply via email to