previously on this list Iain R. Learmonth contributed: > The problem of integration is present, but now that I think about it, is > likely more of an upstream problem than a packaging problem. I guess as > more and more things use dbus, integration will become easier.
Perhaps but integration and universal interfacing is more of a design issue and you could in many cases argue that dbus makes this worse through adding an extra potentially non universal interface especially for servers. The job of dbus is for universal sockets and making life easier for programmers that need that in handling the protocol for them and shouldn't be thought of as anything magic or to promote good design. It can make things cryptic to users and more effort to get a handle on for users for a start. -- _______________________________________________________________________ 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface' (Doug McIlroy) In Other Words - Don't design like polkit or systemd _______________________________________________________________________ I have no idea why RTFM is used so aggressively on LINUX mailing lists because whilst 'apropos' is traditionally the most powerful command on Unix-like systems it's 'modern' replacement 'apropos' on Linux is a tool to help psychopaths learn to control their anger. (Kevin Chadwick) _______________________________________________________________________ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/581286.94347...@smtp115.mail.ir2.yahoo.com
