Is DBUS and API or a protocol?
Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:42:14 -0500
On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 20:54, Sri Ramkrishna wrote:
> Did anybody answer this question? I don't remember..
I thought I replied, but don't see the mail in the list/archives...
D-BUS should technically be both, given the specification on the site,
and the fact that the existing daemon/library is referred to repeatedly
as the "reference implementation" in the docs.
So if D-BUS *isn't* both a protocol and an implementation, the docs
really need correcting. ;-)
And of course, D-BUS being pre-1.0, both the implementation API/ABI and
specification are still up for incompatible changes.
> On Mon, 2 Feb 2004, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:25:33 -0500
> > From: Miguel de Icaza <email@example.com>
> > To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Subject: Is DBUS and API or a protocol?
> > Hey folks,
> > We are considering bindings for the CLI (Mono) for D-Bus, and the
> > question is whether we should bind the C API for D-Bus (because the
> > protocol is not supposed to be stable), or we have the liberty of doing
> > something more dot-net-esque and implement the protocol instead and
> > avoid using the C bindings.
> > Miguel.
> > --
> > dbus mailing list
> > email@example.com
> > http://freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus
Sean Middleditch <firstname.lastname@example.org>
AwesomePlay Productions, Inc.