[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Common server activation
From:       Simon Hausmann <tronical () gmx ! net>
Date:       1999-06-27 22:04:56
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, 27 Jun 1999, Miguel de Icaza wrote:

> 
> > For GNOME this means (if I got things correctly) : No more ORBit specific
> > cookie security handling. I agree here with Steffens points and I think
> > using normal unix sockets for IIOP should be sufficient for now.
> > What do the GNOME people think?
> 
> That is completely broken.  I do not want to see GNOME broken because
> CORBA failed to deal with these problems.
> 
> The N in GNOME stands for "Network", Unix domain sockets are far from
> "Network" in this regard.

OTOH the ORBit specific cookie approach kills any communication with other
ORBs.

However an ORB independend solution, still allowing "secure" inet sockets, 
would be the very best IMHO, although I have no idea how to do it (but I
admit that I'm no security expert.. I prefer eating real sweet cookies
instead of dealing with bits-and-bytes cookies ;-)

> On the other topics, I think Elliot has made some very good comments
> that would benefit us all.

I'm looking forward to his drafts.

> > But I'm not very well informed about GNOME's .gnorba files and their
> > structure, however I think we _could_ put these three types of entries
> > into the common .desktop file standard as they're used commonly between
> > both environments. We just might want to agree on standard names of them.
> 
> Sticking every bit of information you need in a .desktop file is
> broken.  
> 
> It might be ok for some people used to Windows, or to the SuSE config
> setup, but I do not want a gigantic file /etc/The-System to control
> the whole system.
> 
> And bloating .desktop files is exactly the same in this regard.  "We
> need to add more information, where should it go?"  The answer varies,
> but it is definetly not "on the .desktop file".

But why split up the information and confuse the user by this? Why not
keep the information about the application and it's implemented CORBA
services together?

I can't imagine to become a .desktop file of an application, which
additionally implements some CORBA services, really bloated. It's about
two/three additional lines per .desktop file of a CORBA service, and
IMHO that's nothing compared to twenty (or more) Foo[language]=Blah
entries..

Or did I miss your point?

Ciao,
  Simon

--
Simon Hausmann       <hausmann@kde.org>
http://www.kde.org/  <tronical@gmx.net>

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]