ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

[Manuel de la Pena <manuel.delapena@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Barry Warsaw <barry@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mar 03, 2014, at 02:50 AM, Alejandro J. Cura wrote:
>
> >You mention that you don't like the download manager doing the
> >installation, but to put it more strictly: the download manager is
> >actually just running a command given by the scope when a given
> >download is completed. And the installation proper happens in that
> >command. This is done, as you've explained, because the scope process
> >may already be dead by the time that the download has finished, and
> >the dash may not be showing the preview for the current download so
> >it's not keeping track of the download progress and finished signals.
>
> It makes me uncomfortable for u-d-m to be running a command.  In general, I
> think u-d-m should have one job only: download files it's asked to
> download.
>
>
An that is precisely my concern.. I think we should focus in doing one
thing very well. I much prefer to have several "stupid" services and a
single one that orchestrates them than to have a mamouth service that does
all of them with lots of bugs.



> >If needed we can replace this with a dbus call that activates a
> >process in a different security context; but I fail to see a problem
> >yet with spawning a process from udm. Can you shed some more light on
> >it? Moreover, I can't see how doing things differently would have
> >prevented this specific bug.
>
> Sounds like Ted has a workable approach that's worth investigating.
>
>
+1 at least it will simplify the picture we have atm related to testing.


> -Barry
>
> --
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone
> Post to     : ubuntu-phone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>