ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

[Ted Gould <ted@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 15:39 +0200, Alberto Mardegan wrote:

> On 03/19/2013 02:16 PM, Tony Espy wrote:
> > Ah, the devil is in the details.  I wouldn't dismiss the benefits of a
> > stable working code-base so quickly.
> > 
> > The semantics already exist in code, the secure store piece is known to
> > be secure and works as advertised, and the PAM integration allows
> > gnome-keyring to operate without much intervention by the user.  This
> > wasn't always in the case in the past as others have pointed out.
> > 
> > That said, if we've done the analysis and determined that the UI code is
> > too tightly bound to the core logic, then that's another story...
> 
> Oops, I'd better correct myself before I start spreading FUD. :-) I was
> sure that the UI code was very tight to the service, but I don't know
> where I got that from.
> I checked again, and this cannot be farther from the truth. :-)
> gnome-keyring-daemon doesn't even depend on Gtk+, so it looks like that
> it can be reused.
> I didn't investigate how the master password prompt is generated, but
> hopefully it's easy to replicate (I'd better ask to the GNOME keyring
> maintainers about it, to be sure).


So since this was the reason you were suggesting replacing it (I didn't
see another requirements in your original e-mail) do we have any?  It
seems like while we could build something new for fun, if we don't have
a reason we shouldn't.

Ted

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part