Am Donnerstag, den 08.04.2010, 13:37 -0400 schrieb Bill Nottingham:
> Christoph Wickert (christoph.wickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said:
> > Suggestion:
> > GNOME and KDE use their agents, everything else, for example window
> > managers like icewm or openbox, gets lxpolkit.
>
> I'd honestly prefer they use the GNOME one (maintained closer to the
> source, etc.) unless there are speicfic problems with it.
So far there are no problems, but when GConf2 or others get pulled in,
we might get into trouble. People are not using a lightweight WM in
order to install half of GNOME.
> > Rationale:
> > 2. lxpolkit is the smallest package.
>
> 20k of code vs 70k of code? Is that really something worth caring about?
> (Yes, the GNOME PK agent ends up being about 300k installed, but given
> that it's translated into 30+ languages as opposed to lxpolkit's < 10...)
lxpolkit is very young, it was announced a week ago and the number of
translations is continuously rising.
Nevertheless I agree that polkit-gnome offers the most value: It has
more translations and it has the option to cache the password with a
nice tray icon.
> > 3. lxpolkit will be pulled in anyway due to the shortest name.
>
> That's not a useful decision rationale.
I never said it is a useful decision rationale, it's something we cannot
avoid. I agree it's not useful, but please address your complainants to
the yum developers.
Let me repeat what I already said in my previous mail: I don't mind
polkit-gnome as default agent, but
* I'm afraid that yum will choose lxpolkit
* I'm afraid polkit-gnome will have more deps in the future
* we cannot yet use OnlyShowIn=LXDE
> Bill
Regards,
Christoph
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
