Exposure in paroli? [was: Re: Exposure]

c_c cchandel at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 16 01:24:58 CET 2009


Guillaume Chereau wrote:
> I will be happy to start working on it if you want some specific
> services to be done.
Well, if we do go down the services way, I think I would rather start with
the power part of the settings app - so that would be the first service

Guillaume Chereau wrote:
> I like the idea of having a unified way to represent the configurations,
> even though I am not sure services are the best tool to do that.
I kind of agree. But I can't really think of anything else at the moment -
except perhaps directly setting things at the sysfs. The unified app makes a
lot of sense - so I guess we can try this method out - and find our way over
obstacles as we get to them:-)

Guillaume Chereau wrote:
> So for example if you define a class Configuration(Item), you can them
> call Configuration.subclasses and get all the sub classes (even if they
> have been defined in a plugin). That is for example how paroli can
> retrieve all the applications.
Thanks for the pointer. I'm still not all that comfortable with the
framework and there are a lot of gaps in my understanding - so I will need
some hand holding for some time :-)

Guillaume Chereau wrote:
> Also remember that every application may have some specific
> configurations that you may want to edit independently.
  Yes that's definitely there. Though this means that each service will have
to clearly spell out what needs to be configured, what kind of parameters
each config item needs and how to apply the config. That will put a lot of
onus onto each service, rendering the configuration app much simpler. Am I
getting this right ?
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Exposure-tp2116082p2165799.html
Sent from the Openmoko Devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the devel mailing list