Announcing Wasabi - Unifying Desktop Search - feedback needed

Kevin Krammer kevin.krammer at
Fri Feb 9 00:09:15 EET 2007

On Thursday 08 February 2007 22:35, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote:

> Yes, that was the plan, it is a small thing to define them though. Ideally
> I think we should only define the interface name and dbus had a magic
> method GetObjectForInterface("org.freedesktop.blah"), but as far as I know
> this is not possible...

An interface can be implemented multiple times.
What would you expect such a call to return if you pass the interface 
org.freedesktop.DBus.Introspectable? (likely implemented by almost all object 
on all connections)

However, consider there would be a specified Wasabi D-Bus name, e.g. 
org.freedesktop.wasabi then the bus could start a service known to register 
this name (see D-Bus activation)

This is why I thought that the specification really should specify such a 

> This leads me to a question I've been thinking about... Why is it not
> custom to version your dbus interfaces? XML namespaces (typically)  does
> that for example. I was wondering whether to use
> for instance, not that I expect the api to
> change. But if we ever add api we could define a .2 or something like
> that...

D-Bus interfaces is a bit like dlopen. If the method isn't present, you'll get 
an respective error (assuming the service implemenation handles this 

And as you said, it is quite likely that if the interface would have to be 
extended, it might even make sense to specifiy a whole new interface and keep 
the old one for backwards compatability.

However, I am not sure what the "official" D-Bus take on this subject is.

Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer
KDE user support, developer mentoring
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the xdg mailing list