John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 15:53 +0100,
quintesse-8S0oukRTBGq1qGnSU8tcUEEOCMrvLtNR@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Just curious, because I'm not really sure how dbus is normally used but
would it be (theoretically) possible in a future version to exchange the
binary protocol that is being used for another? Or is most of that code
statically included in some/most applications?
Once it reaches 1.0? No. At that point we commit to ABI/API stability.
In practice it can but really it is all implementation details that are
not all that important (other than needing to be documented and stable).
If it becomes important it can be worked into a D-Bus 2.0 release but in
my opinion it is more important to have a stable platform to develop
with.
Agreed, like I said just curious.
Especially because I guess most communication will be between
applications on a single system (that is the case right now, isn't it?)
I thought it would be wise to have a system where the lower level
communication protocol implementation could just be exchanged for
another. Protocol compatibility would not be an issue I guess if all
apps use dynamically loaded dbus libraries but of course if any of it
was statically linked or if dbus is already used for cross-system
communication protocol compatibility suddenly becomes a major issue.
So how many cats did I kill? :-)
Cheers,
-Tako
NB: I agree with your priorities, I'd rather have a working DBus now
than one based on standards in a year :-)
_______________________________________________
dbus mailing list
dbus-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus
| 
