single sign-on project

Aaron J. Seigo aseigo at
Fri Oct 3 04:01:23 BST 2008

On Thursday 02 October 2008, Michael Leupold wrote:
> I don't have to tell you that the higher the number, the less code :) But
> it would also mean less KDE-ish and probably less control.

as long as it is:

* quality, so we can rely on it
* actively developed, so we don't get left high-and-dry
* gets a KDE/Qt interface to it so app devs never have to see it
* doesn't drag in unwanted dependences

it's probably a better thing to have a common daemon.

> What do you think about the general itinerary I should take? Do you think
> adopting keyring is a "no-go" or a valid option once certain circumstances
> are met?

which certain circumstances are you thinkg about?

> Personally I think having a common daemon should be the way to go. I
> wouldn't object to keyring and I'd even help working on it and getting it
> to where we need it.

what dependencies does it bring other than glib when built from source?
what dependencies does it bring other than glib when installed from binary 
packages on major distributions?

> I am however concerned about the hit-by-a-bus factor
> (KDE-wise)

do you know how many people work on the daemon currently?

> and the fact that it might be hard to gather people to code on
> it in KDE as it's written in C/glib and unrelated to Qt.

yes, you can count on very few people being interested ... but it's not like 
everyone has piled onto kwallet either, right? ;)

Aaron J. Seigo
humru othro a kohnu se
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

KDE core developer sponsored by Trolltech

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list