[arch-general] [OT] What is wrong with DBus anyway?

[fons at kokkinizita.net]

On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 10:04:16PM -0200, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:

> ... (though I remember from Linux Audio Users list that you
> don't like Qt too :))

It is completely irrelevant if I like it or not.
If dbus is intended for 'general use' it should
use C types, not those of whatever toolkit. Authors
who don't use that toolkit should not be forced to
depend on it, in particular not if nothing is gained
by doing so.
 
> (about XML) .... With time, you end up grasping it
> as you do with normal text.

That's no reason to accept it. With time you would
adjust to being tortured each day at 6PM as well.
 
> > - It is being abused in major ways. Any app that
> >  uses it to 'enhance the user experience' should
> >  be able to work without it just doing its core
> >  function, but in almost all cases things are not
> >  implemented that way.
> 
> That's something that should be discussed with the developers.
> But they probably have good reasons to use it, or they wouldn't
> do, isn't it?

I don't agree. There's lots of blind belief, ignorance,
misguided ambitions, tribal dynamics, and plain lazyness.
 
> Again, we don't need to be stuck in the past just for the
> sake of it.

Not being stuck in the past doesn't imply you have to
accept something just because it's new and the current
fad.

> The *Kit family maybe could be replaced by a good set of ACLs, but
> even that can be problematic, as not all the concepts that are
> configured by PolicyKit or ConsoleKit are files. And the Unix security
> model of Users/Groups/Others is not very flexible, beyond some simple
> cases.

It's a lot more flexible than you'd imagine. It has been
used with success to manage systems with thousands of users.
If that is possible, do you really think that a managing a
simple personal computer requires anything new ?

Ciao,

-- 
FA