DBUS introspection (Was: DCOP interface in kicker broke compatibility? )

[Waldo Bastian]

On Wednesday 02 February 2005 20:46, Mike Hearn wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:12:33 +0100, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> >> What would be nice would be if there was a flag for the method that
> >> would prevent it from showing up in the list of DCOP methods, but still
> >> be possible to call.  Or at least some way of marking parts of the DCOP
> >> API as deprecated...though I suppose it's a bit late for such.
> >
> > Something to keep in mind for the DBUS introspection format.
>
> Why is that better than just marking it as deprecated in the
> documentation?

I don't think we have proper documentation for DCOP methods.

> They can't be removed until you next do a breaking release, 
> and hiding them from the list of methods introspection shows would be a
> breaking change too. So I guess it'd be purely an advisory flag, but if
> you're going to do that why not put all the docs in the introspection data?

That would actually be a good idea. I guess we could extract docu for the DCOP 
methods and install that somewhere, but looking at the way in which DCOP 
tends to be used I doubt that many people will actually bother to look for 
it. Having it available as part of the introspection data seems to me a 
valuable improvement.

Cheers,
Waldo
-- 
bastian-RoXCvvDuEio at public.gmane.org   |   Free Novell Linux Desktop 9 Evaluation Download
bastian-IBi9RG/b67k at public.gmane.org  |   http://www.novell.com/products/desktop/eval.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20050202/9e22b601/attachment.sig>