Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 24th Nov 2007 23:31 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 286759
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
DCOP was written because CORBA was a God-awful mess
Well, try to fix a mess with another mess like DCOP is ridiculos.
Users don't care about formats. They open a file, it opens and they work with it.
Not technically, but if they see that there documents are not suported in n suite just because some developer tryied to puch an agenda it is.
But you do know that.
Well, try to fix a mess with another mess like DCOP is ridiculos.
No, since it is less a mess than CORBA for the things it was needed for, it is an improvement.
D-Bus takes the same principles and expands the scope, e.g. system bus.
Again an improvement.
We tend to call this succession of improvements progress and the staying at worst solution stagnation.
Since in your opinion seems to be that the direction is reversed, i.e. D-Bus is worse than CORBA for the needs of desktop IPC, you can of course call it a regression. You probably won't get a lot of followers though





Member since:
2005-07-06
Tha'ts what KDE developers say, but is not true, lets say they just say it to sleep well, but DCOP was a mess by it self that needed to be rewrited
DCOP was written because CORBA was a God-awful mess, and judging from the usage of Bonobo in Gnome, that was the right technical decision. DBUS is a direct descendant of that thinking.
Imposing a format over the user needs doesn't makes free software better than MS, simple as that.
Users don't care about formats. They open a file, it opens and they work with it.
anything you put for push your agenda in the users trougth just makes you the same or worse than MS.
All we want is a format that everyone can reasonably implement and use. I don't think that's unreasonable.