[sugar] October 29 - Tarballs due for 0.83.1
Marco Pesenti Gritti
Wed Oct 29 06:42:18 EDT 2008
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at tomeuvizoso.net> wrote:
> The D-Bus method signature has always specified that property values
> are variants, thus the D-Bus level of the API hasn't changed.
Ah ok, I thought the dbus signature was changed.
It also has to be said that the change is transparent to python activities.
> As was explained in that email, if we support that activities can
> specify new properties (such as "page") I don't think that the DS
> should have to make any assumption about the data type of these
> properties. If the DS had to, then activities would need to
> communicate this data type and cases where one activity adds an
> existing property but with a different type should be handled
> somewhat. All this seems to introduce great fragility in the DS and
> activities and I don't really think it's productive. File systems that
> support file attributes have this exact problem and at least xattrs
> has chosen the same approach that I propose.
Yeah, we discussed that at length and I agree with it.
> We could easily hack the DS in 0.83 to return D-Bus strings for
> standard properties that are known (or rather, expected) to contain
> textual data, but introducing this inconsistency in the API may not be
> such a good idea.
After all I think the best solution here is to adapt Etoys. The
inconsistency could be really confusing.
More information about the Sugar-devel