[Thunar-dev] Thunar Extension Framework
timtas at cubic.ch
Wed Sep 14 17:38:23 CEST 2005
Benedikt Meurer wrote:
> Biju Chacko wrote:
>>> I always thought
>>> xfce is supposed to be an alternative for people that like to do without
>>> all that additional, costly stuff. A separate vfs layer certainly would
>>> go into that direction.
>> Well, in xfce we've never followed the approach of "avoid features in
>> order to avoid bloat". Fluxbox et al do a better job of that approach
>> I think our approach has always been "balance features and bloat and
>> always do it the *right* way"
I totally agree, I just don't agree that a separate vfs layer is "the
right way". Implementing something on a higher level that is already
present on a lower level is not "the right thing" in my opinion.
I think the argument of supporting "additional information like
metadata, mime/type etc" is fundamentally wrong, exactly because the
Linux/UNIX/Posix VFS layer does not support it. So you have to implement
the File/metadata mapping yourself anyway for 99% of all files you're
ever going to manage.
As far as I can see very few remote filesystems actually provide
metadata and mime-type information that could be used directly by this
higher level. SMB with NTFS might provide this, but I doubt anybody will
write a thunar vfs module supporting NTFS streams in the near future. As
for audio cds, mobile phones, etc.: they all do not provide this
information at the moment.
> <irony>Your best bet if you want a really lightweight solution is to
> deinstall the operating system. Or even better, don't power on your
> computer at all, that's a fantastic resource saver.</irony>
That would not be a solution to manage files on a computer, would it?
But you realize that yourself, you just wanted to make me look like a fool.
Thanks a lot
>> -- b
> Thunar-dev mailing list
> Thunar-dev at xfce.org
More information about the Thunar-dev