Re: GConf and DBus

[Philip Van Hoof <spam pvanhoof be>]

On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 12:47 -0700, Andy Tai wrote:
> Hi, just curious is using DBus and DBus only in place of ORBit the
> direction of the future of GConf?
> Thanks

There's a GConf branched in CVS that has a port to D-BUS (I think maemo
is using it).

But as it only uses normal remote procedure calls and no (or very few,
but I didn't find any) use of the D-BUS signals, you can say that it's a
1 on 1 port from ORbit-2 to D-BUS. Which isn't ideal: For example with
the D-BUS signals and signal arguments, D-BUS has specific features that
would make a better solution for the notification of changes.


ps. There's some people who are planning to someday redesign such a
system. They started with writing a specification. But as that is
offtopic here, you can E-Mail me and I'll give you the pointers.

-- 
Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend 
home: me at pvanhoof dot be 
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org 
work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be 
http://www.pvanhoof.be - http://www.x-tend.be