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

List:       kfm-devel
Subject:    Re: kdebase/konqueror/client
From:       Simon Hausmann <tronical () gmx ! net>
Date:       1999-06-06 20:03:01
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, 6 Jun 1999, David Faure wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 06, 1999 at 09:44:45PM +0200, Simon Hausmann wrote:
> > On Sun, 6 Jun 1999, David Faure wrote:
> > 
> > Simple answer: no :-)
> > 
> > kfmclient will, in case of Konqueror, ask the activator when the KNaming
> > returns nil. And KActivator will then start Konq :-)
> 
> OK. In a way it's good because the program can decide whether it wants
> to launch the non-running server. OTOH there might be cases where we
> want it to be automatic.
> Sure, we don't want kfmclient to start kdesktop just to arrange its icons ;)

Yes, and: If one calls kfmclient to sort his desktop and he didn't start
kdesktop before, then he's stupid anyway? ;-))

> Well. Let's start the way you suggest.
> In fact we have two kinds of apps :
> 
> - those who want to contact a running application ( kfmclient is one ).
> - those who want to _start_ a server in order to have some service fulfilled.
> 
> The first ones use KNaming, the second ones use KActivator.
> Makes sense.

Exactly.

> > > > What do you think?
> > > Not sure about which tricks you are talking about above,
> > > but a simple registration and binding mechanism is fine with me.
> > 
> > Forget about tricks ;-) , they were evil in regard to consistency and
> > stability.
> ok.
> 
> You shall commit your code :-D

done :-)


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]