On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 17:06 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: > On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 11:20 -0400, Robert Love wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 11:17 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote: > > > On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 10:55 -0400, Robert Love wrote: > > > So instead of having 5000 lines of gnome-power-manager source code, why > > > not simply add a 500 line patch to gnome-hardware-manager that does > > > exactly this and no more? > > > > Nod. > > g-p-m has 4834 lines of code. 5000 wasn't far wrong. I'm not sure how > you could reduce it to a 500 line patch tho. > > The reasons I think it should stay separate are: > > 1. It has deps that g-v-m doesn't need, e.g. libnotify > 2. Some users will want to uninstall it completely (think servers) or > disable it separate from g-v-m.
we can have the power management thing be disabled when there is no battery, as it does now. > 3. It isn't related to other hardware - it's not like plugging in a > scanner and expecting it to lauch a scanning app, it's monitoring > batteries, UPS's and wireless mice, and providing policy for compound > actions. as someone else already said, g-v-m already deals with mice, so we would be adding only battery support. > 4. The release cycle is rapid, and the core code base keeps changing > (which is a benefit of being non-core-gnome). though, being core gnome makes it much better reviewed and tested. > 5. The preferences program would not integrate well with the current > g-v-m UI. I think the power preferences can still be a separate applet. -- Rodrigo Moya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ utopia-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/utopia-list
