Hi, Am 31.03.2011 02:17, schrieb Clemens:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 12:06:35 +1300, Barrett <barrett666@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:I just have a vague idea for what the Services Server is good for. Could you please add to the doc what the problems are and how services server solve them? Just to make sure that we are talking about the same stuff ;-)I'll explain here how the implementation try to solve the problems : * Provide a high-level API for creating services addon. Without using directly the fs api the system can provide functionalities that equals to a real file system implementation. How to implement notifications in add-ons? i'm wondering something like MessageReceived(). * A centralized entity will help to manage things like contact sync in a more flexible way, every modification in the virtual directories can be handled and notified easily. With a server in the middle, you can be sure that apps and users will respect your rules.There is nothing preventing users to not use this API and this compromises the whole approach, right? The user could just use tracker or the terminal to confuse the add-ons.
I think what he is saying is that there would still be the FS, but the server will provide the backend of that FS, hosting also the add-ons. That approach seems doable to me. It allows to have more convenience user land APIs which interface directly with the server, and hosting the add-ons may be simpler to implement. Seeing Person files directly would still work via a dedicated FS, but tightly controlled via the server.
Best regards, -Stephan