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
