KDE is not an OS platform... (And neither is Gnome)

[Dario Freddi]

On Sunday 01 November 2009 17:50:56 nf2 wrote:
> 1) Putting a different label on an already existing system, like I
> would suggest: "This ist the standard system for the major
> file-management protocols, thanks, problem solved". Technically easy,
> but won't work because there are understandably different opinions on
> which one to pick.

Renaming is technically easy. What about porting? What about kio_http and 
protocols not supported by GIO? Sorry, politics aside, I don't see this as a 
feasible and appliable solution, the two layers _are_ different.

> 2) Completely aligning the behavior of protocol-handlers in KIO and
> GVFS in every detail. Sounds like lot's of work which realisticly is
> never gonna happen, because that's a very non exciting task. It
> completely opposes the way developers feel motivated. Also has the
> disadvantage that you can't move forward or backward, change behavior,
> introduce new protocols... Plus this will never be really charming,
> because all the little differences in "the systems" remain (Like GVFS
> mounts appearing in GTK Filecoosers, but not in KDE dialogs...).

In a single word impossible, including the reasons I've written above. Until 
you can replace one with another (GIO with KIO) but not the opposite, you 
can't even start a similar discussion

> 
> 3) Your proposal: Waiting for "the day the cows come home" that people
> come together desiging a shared interface. Technically hard + years of
> work.

Already commented on this

> 
> 4) Wait for the kernel to provide all that *and* wait for applications
> to use different kernel APIs.

Even if it came tomorrow the desktop would have to interface and integrate 
with it. Not to mention porting all the stuff over


Sorry, but I keep seeing my solution as the only feasible way, from every 
point of view, and you still did not put any relevant point to confutate this.

Every solution you proposed had the word "replace", except from mine, which is 
already quite an indicator of the technical difficulty. Do you think it is 
really so hard to write an API and 2 wrappers, especially compared to rename a 
framework and port every existing linux application to it? With my proposal 
you would have to touch ~0 lines of code in applications relying on KIO or GIO 
and just use the new API on 3rd party apps (and eventually write bridges for 
better integration)

...or maybe your final target is really killing KIO and you don't actually 
care for interoperability? Just guessing.

-- 
-------------------

Dario Freddi
KDE Developer
GPG Key Signature: 511A9A3B
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20091101/f5d8fd1e/attachment.sig>