On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Iván Briano (Sachiel) <[email protected]> wrote: > 2011/11/19 Lucas De Marchi <[email protected]>: >> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 7:40 AM, Vincent Torri <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> We should probably focus some efforts on rewriting/upgrading it, and then >>>> bump >>>> the .so version and do a 2.0 release for just e_dbus. >>> >>> better writing an ebus lib like raster told me, not using dbus but our own >>> implementation. It seems (i'm not an expert, Gustavo told me that iirc) >>> that using dbus means translating back and forth messages which is >>> useless. Also, using eet would be better. >> >> I think you are talking about not using libdbus, right? Or you are >> suffering the NIH syndrome trying to invent your own bus? >> > > >From what I recall, he discussed with k-s about the QT and Gtk > guys having their own implementation of libdbus. No need to make > hostile accusations.
I'm not accusing anyone! He said "our own dbus library", which sounded pretty odd for me. Sorry if it looked like I was accusing him. Lucas De Marchi ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
