raphael-langerhorst at gmx.at
Thu May 27 00:00:18 PDT 2004
On Tuesday 25 May 2004 16:03, Tako Schotanus wrote:
> Just wondering, but are the QT bindings actually usable?
> Part of the fuinctionality seems to be there but most of it seems to be
> for sending not for receiving.
The Qt bindings are ... well, I don't exactly know in what state they are. All
I know is that the author (Zack Rusin) has not much time atm to work on them.
I am also very interesting in those bindings.
> If the bindings are not finished yet is anybody working on them?
> Is there a way that I might help out perhaps?
I think consistency checking is surely the first thing to do. Someone has to
take the time to really look at the source code and understand how D-BUS
works. Then the Qt (it's "Qt", not "QT") interface can be brought up-to-date
and missing functionallity added. If you find the time to work on this, that
would be great.
IMO not everyone wanting to work on the project should have to spend that much
time trying to figure out how the source code works. The lack of a (source
code AND how-to-use-this-and-that-interface) documentation (yes, also in
development state!!!) is for me actually a sign of bad quality. It also
doesn't help much to get new developers involved. Also this is the reason why
I am currently not using D-BUS - I can't because I lack the time to teach it
myself from the sourcecode. And if I had time the VERY FIRST thing to do
would be to provide a decent cookbook for developers, because that's what the
project currently needs most (since it hasn't reached it's final production
ready state which requires end-user documentation). Yes, there is the
protocol specification, but that's it, right? Having no decent documentation
really keeps new would-be developers away from the project because it simply
takes much longer until they can really DO something useful with D-BUS.
More information about the dbus