Announcing dbus 1.6.0

[Colin Walters]

On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 15:48 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:

> No; sorry, I'm not going to do major architectural things for a
> relatively far-future benefit if user-visible fixes go for multiple
> months without comment.

I wasn't complaining!  What I was trying to get at is characterizing the
state of 1.4 to 1.6; in other words, what are the potential issues
for upgrading.

> Forking dbus into a thread-safe library for apps (QtDBus etc.) and an
> OOM-safe library for critical system services (dbus-daemon, systemd,
> Upstart etc.) also seems like a bad move when we're still clearing out
> "technical debt" from libdbus

That makes sense; again though, my question wasn't "why isn't this in
1.6??!", it's more that I'd added a mental note around the threading
issue as "may affect SSSD/libvirt".

If it didn't land yet that's completely fine.

> The amount of time I can devote to D-Bus has reduced since 2011, so
> please don't rely on me to maintain it - D-Bus needs to be a team
> effort. (Not that that trying to maintain it alone would work anyway,
> unless we remove the code review policy, which I think would be a very
> bad idea.)

Right, I agree.

Thanks again!