Requesting the following auto-connections for the btop-desktop snap:
system-observe
process-control
hardware-observe
mount-observe
This will allow the snap to behave as one would expect, and given the adoption of btop, it makes sense to make the transition it much more seamless.
+1 from me, the htop and btop snaps already connect these interfaces and users would expect this functionality to just work.
Hey @kz6fittycent
Could you provide a bit more context about why is process-control needed? According to your last comment in btop request, I expected it to not be needed anymore. Has any new functionality been added or anything changed since then?
process-control is definitely required for killing processes. I just confirmed that it doesn’t work in btop-desktop after disconnecting it.
Yes…and I was wrong. I was going to circle back to that after this snap got any approvals.
Make sense then. +1 from me for granting btop-desktop auto-connection to system-observe, process-control, hardware-observe and mount-control
out of interest - @kz6fittycent I see you already have the snap btop - why not just integrate a desktop file etc into this snap rather than having two very similar snaps in the store (which I think would just create confusion for users). ie. if I am running a desktop and I want to have btop from both the CLI and as a launcher in GNOME, would I have to install both snaps? This seems a bit wasteful IMO.
So, here’s the thing. I worked with the upstream dev on the same concept. It wasn’t well received by the community, so we split them up and everyone was happy w/ that.
thanks for the explanation @kz6fittycent, +1 from my end on granting auto-connect to these interfaces for btop-desktop snap
hardware-observe
mount-observe
process-control
system-observe
thanks
+2 votes for, 0 votes against, granting auto-connection of requested system-observe, process-control, hardware-observe and mount-observe interface to snap btop-desktop. This is now live.