Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Apr 2015 16:35:15 +0200 | From | Michele Curti <> | Subject | Re: Issues with capability bits and meta-data in kdbus |
| |
Hi Havoc.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 09:27:56AM -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote: > > If we say it isn't "general purpose" we could mean more than one thing - > > - it's a complete system / batteries-included, with a defined > protocol, vs. a "make your own protocol" kit > - it isn't especially appropriate as a cross-machine protocol, > whether you mean within a cluster or across the internet > - it isn't portable in a very useful way (it kind of runs on > windows/mac but isn't the native way of doing things there) > > On the other hand, it is "general purpose" in the sense that so many > apps and services are using it for so many purposes already (i.e. it > isn't tied to a particular kind of app or service). >
Just out of curiosity, would you like to change something in dbus design, if you didn't have to worry about ABI breaks and the like?
Thanks, Michele
| |