On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 7:59 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:13:15PM +0100, Jan Kurik wrote: >> Proposed System Wide Change: Enable dbus-broker >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EnableDbusBroker > > What about renaming this to DbusBrokerAsTheDefaultDbusImplementation? > > "Enable" correctly describes the technical operation (systemctl invocation), > but it isn't obvious just from the title that this is about replacing > normal dbus daemon. Will do. >> == Scope == >> * Proposal owners: >> ** Fix regressions. >> ** Enabledbus-broker.service in system and user-global context of >> systemd (via systemd presets). > >> ** Pull in dbus-broker package from dbus package. > I'm not sure if this is the correct way to do this. People might want > to install systems with just normal dbus (e.g. in containers or minimal > installations). It'd be better to update comps [1] to pull in dbus-broker > instead of dbus into @Standard. > > [Based on our preeliminary discussions] > This replaces the system wide bus and user busses. > What about the at-spi2 private dbus instance? I have submitted a patch to enable at-spi2 to use dbus-broker in addition to dbus-daemon. > Would dbus-broker be fast > enough to change gdm to use the user bus? /gdm/at-spi2/ ? A priori, I would have thought so, but I have not tried to reproduce their benchmarks, so I can't say for certain. > Do you have plans to replace this last use too? It is certainly possible, but I see this as an orthogonal issue to providing the system/user bus so it is not something we have looked into (apart from making sure it is possible), and ultimately it is up to the at-spi2 maintainers what bus implementation they want to depend on. > If dbus-broker becomes the default like described in the Change page, > what other dependencies on dbus will remain? On the daemon itself, none to my knowledge (assuming my at-spi2 patch is merged). > Since this is already testable [2], what about asking for testing on > devel-announce@ and test-announce@ ? This is a pretty big change, and > I don't we can make the decision to use this by default without > widespread testing. Will do. Cheers, Tom _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
