wayland screen locker and security in general
hramrach at centrum.cz
Thu Apr 7 09:04:51 PDT 2011
2011/4/7 Corbin Simpson <mostawesomedude at gmail.com>:
> 2011/4/7 Michal Suchanek <hramrach at centrum.cz>:
>> If you have some input on awesomeness of dbus which I miss I am all
>> ears but so far nobody could point out any advantage to me when this
>> topic came to the table.
>> Sure, dbus likely includes a protocol for passing around the messages
>> but I am sure there are already dozens of protocols for serializing
>> data into datagrams and/or pipes (which is what all communication
>> boils down to in the end), and if the one dbus uses is in some way
>> awesome and standing out from the crowd then the authors and
>> proponents of dbus fail miserably at explaining that.
> It's a de facto standard. People use it, people rely on it, people
> expect it to be in place. This is really the other way around: *You*
> should explain why dbus is inadequate and *you* should be suggesting
I don't use it and I am perfectly fine.
> Speaking of which, what are these "dozens of protocols," anyway? Can
> you name some of them? Can you suggest why they would be better than
> dbus for this task?
Since Wayland is not using dbus right now and is not going to use it
for its core protocol introducing it is superfluous.
I was merely asking if dbus has some merits on its own. The fact that
gnome uses it does not convince me.
This is somewhat offtopic here so I suggest that if your further input
relates only to how awesome dbus is you send it offlist.
More information about the wayland-devel