Re: Towards better OAF/Bonobo integration

[Carlos Perelló Marín <carlos gnome-db org>]

El d_ 28 Jul 2001 18:40:27 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak escribi_
> On 29Jul2001 03:18AM (+0200), Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> >
> > I really think this is a good idea
> > 
> 
> Glad you think so.
> 
> > and yes, just one comment, and sorry for insisting, but, what about remote object activation?
> > AFAIK, it does not work yet, so I think this OAF/Bonobo integration
> > could be the right moment to think about this. Remote object activation
> > is very important for a component system,
> > and this is, IMO, what GNOME's component system is missing.
> > 
> > The other day, talking with some friends, I learnt that the "agreed
> > upon" (supposedly this was said by Elliott) solution for this was to use
> > rsh to connect to the remote system and then start an oafd on that
> > machine. I really think this solution is not very good.
> > 
> > So, what about having a second oaf daemon, integrated in inetd, which
> > listens to a pre-established port for remote oaf's?
> > I don't know too much what would be involved in the communication
> > between the remote oaf's, but I suppose the work to do it would be the
> > same in the rsh-case than in the inetd-service case
> 
> I'll try to write up some thoughts about remote activation. I'm not
> sure if the inetd approach will work because oafd is per-user. I think
> if you did the rsh-type approach, only with ssh, the result might be
> almost reasonable.
> 


What about made oafd be multiuser (in some situations)?.

For example, we could do that wombat (the evolution calendar/addressbook
server) share its data with several Evolution users (from remote
workstations). With this feature we don't need to create our own
protocol to manage this connection. It will be the same with local o
remote connections. Of course, we will need to add oaf some way to
authentication the user.

> I don't think I've run into a real case where transparent remote
> activation is that important yet, though.
> 

Please think in my previous example. The use of SSH/RSH is not a valid
solution (for me). We should do it much more better.

> Regards,
> 
> Maciej
> 
> 

Bye
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-components-list mailing list
> gnome-components-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-components-list
> 
--
Carlos Perelló Marín
mailto:carlos gnome-db org
mailto:carlos hispalinux es
http://www.gnome-db.org
http://www.Hispalinux.es
Valencia - Spain