I see. Then we'll wait until solaris power management team decides the final stability level of libpolkit, before we continue with the contract (if needed).
Regards. --Irene Gary Winiger wrote: >> Gary Winiger wrote: >> >>>> libpolkit interfaces >>>> -------------------- >>>> Interface level: Volatile >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Why are these Volatile? If they remain Volatile, >>> won't any consuming case need a contract? I presume >>> LSARC/2007/702 GPM to be a consumer. Shouldn't there >>> be a prototype contract as part of this case >>> >> Yes, we are working on the contract. >> The contract will be exactly the same as >> http://sac.eng/Archives/CaseLog/arc/LSARC/2007/702/contracts/contract-desktop-battery.txt, >> >> which was signed by this team and JDS. >> > > I must say that contract is not very clear. As I would say > about the supplying case materials. I should have paid closer > attention to the details. I'm not concerned with the HAL/DBUS stuff. > I guess I'm doing that now with this case. > > I'm concerned with the polkit authorization interpretation > and the RBAC Rights Profiles. Those are Solaris administative > interfaces which I believe need a higher stablility than is > afforded by Volatile. Having cross consolidation contracts > for private or Volatile APIs is one thing, but saying that > the authorizations and Rights Profiles names and function can > change at patch boundaries concerns me. > > Gary.. >
