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

[Denis A. Altoé Falqueto]

Hi, fellow archers.

I've created a new email with a new subject, so that who wants to
ignore this completely, can do it easily.

The recent past discussions about DBus got me thinking about an
unanswered question: what is technically wrong with DBus? After some
time researching about that, I can't find that answer by myself.

DBus is just a way to make applications communicate. It can be used in
several languages, namely C, C++, Java, Perl, Python, Ruby, and many
more. There are tools for it in bash, although there's some
limitations with that, but is very easy to do something fast in python
or perl or ruby or...

It (DBus) has some interesting mechanisms to activate daemons just
when needed. I find this feature very interesting, so that you only
spend the resources when you really need.

One restriction is that it is not network enabled, so it only works
locally. But in the home page, there is a invitation to improve that
situation (http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/DBusRemote).

Anyway, I would like to read what others have to say about DBus, but
please give techinical reasons. I don't want to know who likes and who
dislikes DBus. And I don't have anything against who dislikes DBus.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

Thanks.

-- 
R: Porque prejudica a legibilidade do texto.
P: Porque é ruim colocar a resposta de um e-mail antes do texto citado?

-------------------------------------------
Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
-------------------------------------------