From kde-devel Tue Jun 29 17:05:45 1999 From: Simon Hausmann Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 17:05:45 +0000 To: kde-devel Subject: Re: Common server activation X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-devel&m=93067564313134 On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Bavo De Ridder wrote: > On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Waldo Bastian wrote: > >Simon Hausmann wrote: > >[LOTS OF STUFF] > > > >Do I understand the problem correctly by stating that we need: > > > >* A uniform way to find the naming/service cq. trader. > > > >* A uniform way (idl?) to access this service. > > > >* A naming scheme (capabilities scheme?) shared across both > > desktops. > > > >That is then enough for an application to get a reference to > >the required CORBA service object. > > > >The naming server/trader (which one do we preferably use?) > >will need to know which CORBA services exist and how to > >activate them. If we can't agree on a common scheme for this, > >it should still be possible to support both scheme's right? > > > > No decisions to take, all this already exists: CORBA Component Model. Which > Naming Service to use ??? COS Naming Services of course. This is the only > standard-one. There is absolutely no need to reinvent basic things like a > naming service. ..now compare the size of the MICO naming implementation with KNaming.. ;-) Ciao, Simon P.S.: Can you give me an URL for the "CORBA Component Model", please ? -- Simon Hausmann http://www.kde.org/