GSoC idea

[Sebastian Sauer]

On 02/24/2012 05:33 AM, Sebastian Sauer wrote:
> On 02/23/2012 05:59 PM, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
>> On Thursday 23 February 2012 Feb, Smit Patel wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Sebastian Sauer<mail at dipe.org>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> **
>>>> On 02/23/2012 01:31 PM, Smit Patel wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to propose a GSoC project. Here's the brief description about
>>>> project idea.
>>>> Provide a dbus API that provides an generic interface that can be 
>>>> used by
>>>> external bibliography engines (xbiblio, kbibtex, bibus)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> dbus is optional[1] and so would be everything that depends on it. 
>>>> So, why
>>>> dbus? Why not just a plugin? If it should be in another process 
>>>> (stability,
>>>> long-running things, shared among Words-processes, etc) then why 
>>>> not for
>>>> example QLocalServer?
>>>>
>>> If dbus is not available for windows and OSX then we can rule that out.
>> Well, actually dbus _is_ available on both Windows and OSX.
> 1. re Windows; Not per default what means you need to ship your own 
> version of it in the installer. If any app does that then it 
> completely voids what dbus is for. dbus is and always will be be an 
> alien on that platforms cause all other software is using the native 
> IPC mechanism. You end with an IPC only used by you (not exactly what 
> it is for) and even more worse, you exclude yourself from the outer 
> world by shipping something own.
>
> 2. re OSX; my knowledge is a few years old but back then when I hacked 
> on dbus making it running at >=Vista I

As extension; the core-work on that was done by our KDE at Windows folks 
who did all the amazing work to bring dbus to Windows. I just did 
contribute some patches on top.

> did not found a single line of code that handles OSX. But I can 
> imagine that it changed meanwhile. In any case I doubt it's well 
> maintained and it definitively is not straith forward to work on that 
> code-base.
>
>> It's just a bit of a bother on Windows and rather a big bother on OSX.
>
> And here I ask myself why we should bother at all? What gain does this 
> bring to Calligra? I would say exactly zero, none, null, nil, nada.
>
> But yes, technical it should be possible to just port dbus to e.g. 
> Symbian, Android, OSX, QNX, etc. pp. It's just not related to Calligra.
>
> _______________________________________________
> calligra-devel mailing list
> calligra-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
>