From kde-core-devel  Thu Sep 30 00:09:59 2004
From: Frans Englich <frans.englich () telia ! com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 00:09:59 +0000
To: kde-core-devel
Subject: Re: RFC: DBUS & KDE 4
Message-Id: <200409300009.59427.frans.englich () telia ! com>
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=109650263020163

On Wednesday 29 September 2004 23:31, Michael Pyne wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 September 2004 07:23 pm, Maks Orlovich wrote:
> > Anyway, my point was not about quality of wrapping.
>
> Well then I got confused, as I wasn't sure what point you were trying to
> make exactly. ;-)
>
> You are of course absolutely right about the dangers of being dependant on
> unmaintainable code.  I can't comment further about this then since I've
> read neither the DCOP nor the DBUS source.  I would hope that the DBUS code
> is at least written sanely so that it would be possible for others to fix
> it if needed.
>
> Does anyone have a comparison of the bus numbers [1] between DCOP and DBUS?

FWIW, I don't think it have to be that specific to conclude D-BUS will be well 
maintained. If we assume the complexity and contribution-threshold of DBUS is 
similar to DCOP, it is reasonable to conclude it will be at least as well 
maintained as DCOP.

Also, as written before, when also KDE jumps on the DBUS wagon, it will have a 
large influence and even faster become a de facto standard in linux/open 
source systems. It will be of a large importance to 3rd parties, and hence 
distributors. I think big players like SUSE, Redhat, Novell, etc. will make 
sure it humms along.


Cheers,

		Frans