Sounds mostly good to me. Michael
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 02:04:00PM +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: > OK. So how do we get there? My feeling is that we should do it in three steps: > > 1 > > * Remove the factory service from Sugar and move to > one-instance-per-process. (Btw service_name in the activity.info > wouldn't make a lot of sense anymore, we should probably rename to > bundle_id or bundle_name). > * Implement a single instance mechanism in Browse and Etoys. Agreed. > > 2 > > * Plug in the security service, enabled conditionally if the Bitfrost > service exist. Agreed, but since this is conditional, I think we should do this as soon as I manage to produce acceptable patches. > 3 > > * Do some testing and when stuff works well enough enable the Bitfrost > service by default on the images. > > Since one-instance-per-process is a Trial-3 goal, I don't see a lot of > value in trying out Bitfrost + multiple instance factory before. We > would risk to end up debugging something quite different from the > final thing. Fair enough, but the changes in Rainbow required to drop support for the current factory system are minimal; we basically just drop the lines that send the `create' message on the session bus, instead passing the instance dict on the command line. (Hence we need to agree on an argument passing convention.) _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
