> - issue: there may be issues if users try to use enlightenment_remote
> -module-* while using the config dialog at the same time - this stuff
still
> needs more testing in that area.
yes. a LOT of config has that problem. i am wondering what we should do
about it. despite the effort with e_remote - i am beginning to think - to
reduce code size and maintenance - of literally removing e remote calls if
they are fully implemented in a gui. i know people will cry and moan - but
having to implement a gui AND ipc code for all config options is a lot of
work. many new options have no ipc as they go direct to a gui. i am thinking
that just to save us all work - remove the ipc config stuff. in fact just
remove e_remote... yes people will complain - if we didn't have an open
development process they wouldn't. people seem to hate change - even if they
use cvs and know its subject to change - INCLUDING removal of things.
anyway - in removing the ipc, we also remove all the code needing to
handle if/when the modules are screwed with from elsewhere etc. making e 1.
more maintainable, 2. less liable to have bugs, 3. smaller, 4. faster to
develop for. i am ONLY proposing we remove the ipc handlers for stuff that
*IS* fully implemented in a gui. then it acts also as a todo list of things
we need to still add a gui for :)
I hope other readers haven't missed this, buried deep into my tedious email
- others will surely have thoughts on this.
As a user I personally only use enlightenment_remote for re-setting my
config after it gets wiped out (this is quite nice really, during
development). Otherwise, hmmm.
Um, if we are going to remove enlightenment_remote then we need to make
the config system a lot more robust. It shouldn't destroy my config on
update (yes, I know, CVS software, but this will have to be tackled at
some point as once e17 is released we'll need to be able to update e
without destroying users configs).
The benefit of e_remote at the moment is that I can write a script that
reconfigures e as I want it. I don't care if it destroys my config on
reboot as I can run the script. Without that I'd have to go through the
tedious process of doing it through the menus.
What does it matter if a new option doesn't have ipc yet? If someone
wants it, they'll add it in. They don't all have to be there for the
system to function.
dan
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
