Efficient Coding Strategy for Desktop Environment Development
ulrik.mikaelsson at gmail.com
Sun Nov 12 12:44:12 GMT 2006
I could add another candidate where a lot of resources are wasted in
parallell: Filesystem indexing and meta-storage.
In general, I would say everything that could be described as a "system
service", should be implemented independent of a specific desktop.
Regarding DCOP, though, I must add I think DBUS didn't even exist when KDE
saw the need for object communication.
On 11/11/06, Elias Humbolt <elias at asb-online.at> wrote:
> How more Code could be shared between "competing" Desktops Environments
> I understand Ubuntu as a project where people of different interests and
> origin build their dreams together on common ground. We have come far
> but it is still far to go until we can really say, we live/develop
> following the concept mentioned above.
> At the current time I still see talent, time and energy wasted by Ubuntu
> family members of different religion each one trying to reinvent it's
> own wheel. Instead they should create one stable felly together and
> apply their unique touch to it by adding their custom hub cap.
> A good example for illustration is network-manager. The deamon running
> in the background represents the felly, the common ground. And the Gnome
> and KDE GUIs represent the individual hub caps.
> This approach ensures there are not two incompatible implementations for
> the same problem in Ubuntu like powernowd and kpowersaved. And work is
> not lost, like all the KDE attempts to create a config utility for wlan
> devices. Or even like with dcop which will be replaced by dbus in KDE4.
> Possibly dcop could be what dbus is nowadays, if only this technology
> would not have been hidden inside kdelibs, unaccessible for anybody
> interested, only to be available when installing kdelibs and even the QT
> library which it depends on.
> For that reason huge coding efforts are lost for ever, programming hours
> wasted, because of course it does not make sense for KDE to maintain
> dcop if dbus is around anyway and fulfils the same purpose.
> Consequently, we should ensure in the future, that this does not happen
> again. Common grounds must be found, universal tools created, efforts
> The next best candidates would be:
> Power Management and Laptop Buttons
> Both could be handled by a daemon and controled by an individual GUI in
> each desktop environment. Other candidates could certainly be
> Great things could be acieved if Ubuntu when all it's flavours act like
> a big family. The efforts of the one family member should also be
> beneficial for the other members as well.
> Wasn't this the idea of Open Source anyway?
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ubuntu-devel