An analysis about a generic desktop application configuration management system

[Patrick Patterson]

On Monday 11 April 2005 20:42, P. Kaluza wrote:
> So i _suggest_ (as others have before me) to adopt DBUS as the protocol
> for all client<->first-tier-server. This _is_ negotiagble, but please
> state your reasons. It is actually an implementation detail - but the
> one I'd like to see decided really really soon.
>
Why bother at this point? Let's do like every other standards body before us, 
and define what the protocol looks like, and ignore the transport of that 
protocol - it may be that D-BUS is the right way to go, but there could be an 
argument made for DCOP, and straight up Unix Domain Sockets.

So let's start working towards the checklist - that's it, that's all - when 
the requirements states "There shall be a server and a client and they shall 
talk with the following semantics", then doing a DBUS, DCOP or any other 
implementation is trivial, and writing bridges between them is trivial as 
well...



-- 
Patrick Patterson
Technical Ambassador
Net Integration Technologies R&D
http://open.nit.ca