Re: Tag support, dcop query support

[Davyd Madeley <davyd madeley id au>]

On Sun, 2005-08-07 at 21:26 +0800, Grahame Bowland wrote:

> I think it's pretty much whether you want something that works on anyone
> with KDE's system, without relying on something that does not exist.
> There is no bridge between D-Bus and DCOP, they are only talking about
> an API-level shim to make it easier to convert programs over to using
> DBUS.

I still think a bridge would be a damned cool thing to have. Expose
arbitrary DCOP calls through D-BUS. I was suggesting that one be
written.

> Running the dcop binary;
>   a) works
>   b) is less than twenty lines of code
>   c) doesn't add any extra external library dependencies. This is a Good
>   thing. Note that dbus is not API stable and everyone has different,
>   binary incompatible versions of it installed on their computer.

> Give me a rational argument why running the dcop binary is bad :-P

Calling command line programs from inside applications always ends up in
tears. Plus, you have to check for the dcop binary, it'll mess up
people's dependancy trees, with D-BUS/Bonobo we can just look for the
object without having to go talk to the filesystem or deal with files
being moved about.

I am pretty sure that the D-BUS API is not going to be changing much
past 0.3, which is what most people are now running, or will be running
very soon. It honestly sounds saner then calling the dcop binary and
parsing its output.

I 100% do not like the idea of adding KDE dependancies, no matter how
cool their IPC system is perceived to be, or how much people like their
media player.

--d

-- 
Davyd Madeley

http://www.davyd.id.au/
08B0 341A 0B9B 08BB 2118  C060 2EDD BB4F 5191 6CDA