Notifications-future, a recap

[Dario Freddi]

2012/9/21 Aaron J. Seigo <aseigo at kde.org>:
> if the "new" can be achieved by extending or building on galago, that would
> seem to me to be a much better thing.
>
> and no, galago is not perfect. it's not even "great", but it is passable and
> widely used and that gives it a lot of value.
>
> if it turns out that we can not indeed achieve truly useful things without
> creating something completely new, we'll still need to support galago
> notifications in Plasma Workspaces, and we'll still want a bridge to galago so
> we don't lose integration with other workspaces (otherwise our app devs and
> users will, rightfully, complain)

Exactly - and just to complete the story, I have been there before
with inhibition - although KDE now uses its own standard, it still
remains 100% back and forth compatible with fd.o's one. So I don't
know where it came up that I planned to drop the existing standard,
but (especially knowing where I come from) I never thought about it
for a second.

Aaron got it perfectly right, so I guess we can cut this particular
part of the discussion here since we're debating over nothing, and
everyone is saying the same thing.

> so ... what are the things that can not be achieved by building on top of
> galago?
>
>> GNOME3 notifications are quite good, implementing at least one concept long
>> pursued by Notmart's vision (being able to specify which notifications
>> should be kept and which notifications are irrelevant). To do this they had
>> least expand galago spec.
>
> key word: expand.

this ^. And (at least try to) upstream.

>
> --
> Aaron Seigo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Plasma-devel mailing list
> Plasma-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
>