Is DBUS and API or a protocol?

[Sean Middleditch]

On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 20:54, Sri Ramkrishna wrote:
> Did anybody answer this question?  I don't remember..

I thought I replied, but don't see the mail in the list/archives...

D-BUS should technically be both, given the specification on the site,
and the fact that the existing daemon/library is referred to repeatedly
as the "reference implementation" in the docs.

So if D-BUS *isn't* both a protocol and an implementation, the docs
really need correcting.  ;-)

And of course, D-BUS being pre-1.0, both the implementation API/ABI and
specification are still up for incompatible changes.

> 
> sri
> 
> On Mon, 2 Feb 2004, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> 
> > Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:25:33 -0500
> > From: Miguel de Icaza <miguel@novell.com>
> > To: dbus@freedesktop.org
> > Subject: Is DBUS and API or a protocol?
> > 
> > Hey folks,
> > 
> >     We are considering bindings for the CLI (Mono) for D-Bus, and the
> > question is whether we should bind the C API for D-Bus (because the
> > protocol is not supposed to be stable), or we have the liberty of doing
> > something more dot-net-esque and implement the protocol instead and
> > avoid using the C bindings.
> > 
> > Miguel.
> > 
> > -- 
> > dbus mailing list
> > dbus@freedesktop.org
> > http://freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus
> > 
-- 
Sean Middleditch <elanthis@awesomeplay.com>
AwesomePlay Productions, Inc.