Aaron Seigo aseigo at kde.org
Wed Sep 29 19:07:17 BST 2004

On September 29, 2004 11:31, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> > i have a draft for a new systray spec that resolves the insanity of the
> > current one. as it stands it relies on DBUS, since it provides certain
> > things (e.g. Message Busses) that DCOP doesn't which are needed for
> > something like the systray.
>  I don't think you having a draft of something using DBUS quite counts.
> There'd have to be implementations of it, and users of it, and you don't
> have at least the latter one at the present time.

of course, but you got my intended point here:

> > so... it's coming. it's just that DBUS is so relatively new that adoption
> > is only beginning.
>  I agree here. Adoption of DBUS seems to be just a question of time.

things are being written for it. it takes time. =)

>  And BTW, I personally have certain doubts about a spec for
> systray-over-DBUS being widely accepted (I've recently noticed that our
> (mis)use of systray seems to be against the GNOME HIG, and I'd expect the
> other GUIs (that is, window managers) to prefer X-based solutions over
> something as heavy as DBUS).

X-based, which means X-specific, which means available only to X11 apps, which 
means completely fubarred when it comes to icon management in the systray, 
which means stuck with application-by-application defined interaction rather 
than desktop-centric policy, which means... no, sorry, this simply isn't an 
option. i've been around this tree more times than i care to remember and X11 
is just completely the wrong technology layer for this.

Aaron J. Seigo

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list