>> Why do I feel like I'm missing something?
>> 
>> We want kdbus to improve performance.
>
>Yes.
 I agree with you.  

>> Many/most/some dbus applications will require porting.
>
>Yes.
 Depend on libraries which are using application. 
 Applications are using, 
 - libdbus, libdbus-bindings (ie. Dbus-glib, edbus, Etc.), gdbus  -> No. 
 - applications are using different libraries above -> Yes. 


>> That is too much work, so we need a compatibility daemon that is going 
>> to suck away any performance gain, and in fact probably make 
>> performance worse.
>
>Quite possibly.
 No. 

>> We're counting on the widespread adoption of kdbus in the future, 
>> which will get the performance back as everyone ports everything from
dbus to kdbus.
>
>Yes.
> 
>> I can see kdbus as a long term plan.
>> 
>> I can't image why it makes any sense at all for Tizen3.
>
>Nor I. Unless there are specific gains to be had for specific daemons that
we plan on porting, I don't see the point of going ahead >of upstream.
>
   We have a kdbus solution already and it's working now. 
   Our solution is not using a bus bridge or something. 

>> I see lots of work and a system that does not perform as well as it 
>> does today with "real" dbus.
>> 
>> Someone please tell me what I'm missing.
>
>You're missing that kdbus is still not ready for prime time.

"The work on kdbus is progressing well and Kroah-Hartman expressed
 optimism that it would be merged before the end of the year"
 [http://lwn.net/Articles/551969/]




_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to