Re: Good news on claws-mail
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 17:30:27 +0100
berenger.morel@neutralite.org wrote:
>
>
> Le 18.10.2014 16:14, Brian a écrit :
> > Which once again raises the main question; what does systemd have
> > to do
> > with this? The original post gives an unexplained solution to a
> > non-existent problem.
>
> Dbus is (a crap, but not only) a tool to allow applications to share
> informations with other applications (why should those apps to do so,
> is often a mistery for me.
Hi berenger.morel,
I think you and I have the same basic beliefs about software. Enabling
applications to permiscuously talk to each other, to broadcast their
business to everybody else and to listen to (and presumably take action
depending upon) everybody else's broadcasts, greatly reduces
repairability of the system.
I'm a huge believer in modularity, and one of my definitions of
modularity is that module A knows the business of module B **only** to
the extent it needs to know B's business in order to function. In most
cases, the need is zero.
POSIX gives two modules many, many ways to communicate: Files, piping,
fifos, sockets, heck, I've probably missed five or ten. If both modules
know they'll need to communicate, it's a snap. If one knows, it can be
built with a fifo interface, like mplayer. Or a socket interface.
> Especially why should them have to do that
> in XML...).
I guess that's so they can pass huge, arbitrary data in dbus. My
thought when contemplating that is "what could *possibly* go wrong?"
[clip]
>
> Now, how softwares did before was maybe a nightmare. Doing the wheel
> everytime, in different fashion, etc.
Later today I'm writing a whole page on reinventing the wheel. Unless
the wheel you need is very similar to the wheel already invented,
reinventing is simpler, and produces a much smaller and robust design,
than trying to strongarm somebody else's wheel into your needs.
> The other reliable technique I know is through window managers, by
> setting a flag (I do not know how it's named, I only know about this
> technique because some softwares uses it... like, for example,
> claws.) which, depending on the WM, will result in a visual and or
> audio hint.
Those visual and audio hints are one of the few things that most
programs might need to write to. They need a predefined standard to
write to, and I guess dbus is the standard being used. If I were in
charge of standards, I might have used something simpler (like a fifo
with a very simple data definition) exclusively for notifications (the
official visual and audio hints), but hey, that's just me.
SteveT
Steve Litt * http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance
Reply to: