On 06/30/2011 07:38 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 07:57 +0100, José Matos wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 June 2011 20:38:31 Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>> Each DE wants its own
>> user interface? Fine, but they do essentially the same things, so why
>> can't they both use a common library for keystore functionality?
> Because it takes time to get there. :-)
> There are talks about this already.
Do you have a specific reference? Last time I looked, these talks had
been going on for a very long time and didn't seem to be progressing
very fast. I'd be glad to be proved wrong.
Talks .. mmm ... the best way to have this use a good library - is to
build a good library that is better than what is there now.
There is no strong incentive to change a perfectly working tool to
switch a new (and as yet unproven library which may have more bugs)
just for the sake of using the same one as someone else.
i.e. If its useful - and someone builds a great tool - it will be
used ... but just focusing on the commonality and not the goals and
improvements is likely to (and probably should) not go too far ..
my views of course ... frankly in this case, I found seahorse's
desire to be all things to all tools a complete wrong headed approach.
ssh-agent and gpg-agent are designed for a particular need and do
that one need very well ... being all things to all people is not always
the right way either ...