2011/4/7 Corbin Simpson <mostawesomed...@gmail.com>: > 2011/4/7 Michal Suchanek <hramr...@centrum.cz>: >> If you have some input on awesomeness of dbus which I miss I am all >> ears but so far nobody could point out any advantage to me when this >> topic came to the table. >> >> Sure, dbus likely includes a protocol for passing around the messages >> but I am sure there are already dozens of protocols for serializing >> data into datagrams and/or pipes (which is what all communication >> boils down to in the end), and if the one dbus uses is in some way >> awesome and standing out from the crowd then the authors and >> proponents of dbus fail miserably at explaining that. > > It's a de facto standard. People use it, people rely on it, people > expect it to be in place. This is really the other way around: *You* > should explain why dbus is inadequate and *you* should be suggesting > alternatives.
I don't use it and I am perfectly fine. > > Speaking of which, what are these "dozens of protocols," anyway? Can > you name some of them? Can you suggest why they would be better than > dbus for this task? > Since Wayland is not using dbus right now and is not going to use it for its core protocol introducing it is superfluous. I was merely asking if dbus has some merits on its own. The fact that gnome uses it does not convince me. This is somewhat offtopic here so I suggest that if your further input relates only to how awesome dbus is you send it offlist. Thanks Michal _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel