2009/12/9 Jedy Wang :
> Thanks for your reply. Will gnome-powre-manager 2.30 depends on upower?
Yes, I hope so as long as we can add it to the GNOME external deps list.
> Except name changing, are there any new features in upower?
Nope. At some point I'm going to talk to Bastien about ambient li
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your reply. Will gnome-powre-manager 2.30 depends on upower?
Except name changing, are there any new features in upower?
Thanks,
Jedy
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 09:34 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> 2009/12/8 Jedy Wang :
> > 1) When will the renaming happen, in one week, one mo
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 09:34 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> 2009/12/8 Jedy Wang :
> > 1) When will the renaming happen, in one week, one month, before
> > gnome-2-30's release or after?
>
> I'm not sure. I'm tempted to push the upower code into a new git repo,
> for clarity.
FWIW, I'm planning to
2009/12/8 Jedy Wang :
> 1) When will the renaming happen, in one week, one month, before
> gnome-2-30's release or after?
I'm not sure. I'm tempted to push the upower code into a new git repo,
for clarity.
> 2) What level of ABI stability will upower/udisks provide?
For me personally, I think th
Hi David,
We are porting devkit-power to Solaris. I have 2 questions:
1) When will the renaming happen, in one week, one month, before
gnome-2-30's release or after?
2) What level of ABI stability will upower/udisks provide?
Thanks,
Jedy
On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 10:35 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
2009/12/6 Ross Burton :
> That's a nice theory and all, but are devicekit-disks or -power actually
> compilable on non-Linux? (that's a rhetorical question by the way)
Sure, DK-p has the linux stuff separated out. I've compiled it for
freebsd recently.
Richard
___
On Sun, 2009-12-06 at 19:29 +0100, Krzysztof Kotlenga wrote:
> In my view, DeviceKit targets many platforms, not
> only Linux. Do other platforms use udev? No. Will they? Highly
> unlikely. So yeah, naming it after udev must be a great idea. They
> don't even operate on the same level.
That's a ni
Tobias Arrskog wrote:
> I'm the developer for XBMCs power integration (nearly all dbus
> related stuff actually). And you can take a look at our code if you
> wish, the power integration is rather simple since were mostly an
> application but it's neatly abstracted (i.e. XBMC doesn't know if
> it'
I'm the developer for XBMCs power integration (nearly all dbus related stuff
actually). And you can take a look at our code if you wish, the power
integration is rather simple since were mostly an application but it's
neatly abstracted (i.e. XBMC doesn't know if it's hal, devicekit old, new
devicek
David Zeuthen wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 09:08 +0100, Ali Abdallah wrote:
>
>> Are you able to give satisfying answer now?
>>
>
> Yes.
>
What is it?
>
>> i don't understand what is the benefit of changing the D-Bus
>> name and involving developers/packagers in a extra work for
>
On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 09:08 +0100, Ali Abdallah wrote:
> Are you able to give satisfying answer now?
Yes.
> i don't understand what is the benefit of changing the D-Bus
> name and involving developers/packagers in a extra work for
> just nothing.
This could have been the case with any new Devic
David Zeuthen wrote:
> Hey,
>
> A lot of people have been asking what's up with the name DeviceKit-disks
> now that there is no DeviceKit daemon (which was replaced by libudev and
> libgudev). I never really was able to give a satisfying answer.
>
>
Are you able to give satisfying answer now? i
> As an alternate, I'm pretty sure they should work okay if run in
> parallel, if a little wasting on resources.
>
Yeah, of course, with addition to HAL...
> Richard.
> ___
> devkit-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://li
2009/12/2 Tobias Arrskog :
> I guess this is obvious but might aswell ask, will the name change be
> reflected in the dbus names aswell?
Yes, the interface name, the library name, the binary name, the whole shebang.
Because of this, distros may want to keep shipping DK-p in stable
releases and ju
I guess this is obvious but might aswell ask, will the name change be
reflected in the dbus names aswell?
(P.S sorry richard for replying to you privately first)
Tobias
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> 2009/12/2 Arnaud Quette :
> > any idea on the new DK-power name (prob
2009/12/2 Arnaud Quette :
> any idea on the new DK-power name (probably 'upower' for the coherence
> of the whole)?
upower for sure.
Richard.
___
devkit-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/
2009/12/2 Richard Hughes :
> 2009/12/1 David Zeuthen :
>> I believe Richard has similar plans for DeviceKit-power.
>
> Indeed I do. I'm going to push out one more release of DeviceKit-power
> next Monday (for the distros) and then pull the rename branch into git
> master.
any idea on the new DK-po
2009/12/1 David Zeuthen :
> I believe Richard has similar plans for DeviceKit-power.
Indeed I do. I'm going to push out one more release of DeviceKit-power
next Monday (for the distros) and then pull the rename branch into git
master.
Richard.
___
devki
On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 16:08 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> compared to +30K for udisks). This branch now requires udisks >= 1.0.0
> and udisks < 1.0.0. I suggest vendors do the same with packages.
Eh, that would be udisks >= 1.0.0 and udisks < 1.1.0
^
Hey,
A lot of people have been asking what's up with the name DeviceKit-disks
now that there is no DeviceKit daemon (which was replaced by libudev and
libgudev). I never really was able to give a satisfying answer.
So, after talking to a few of people (I suck at naming so I really need
help here)
20 matches
Mail list logo
