[vos-d] bridging to COM, .NET, DBUS (was: second draft requirements)

[Peter Amstutz]

Quick thing to point out, COM and D-BUS are fundamentially different in 
that COM objects are usually loaded in-process, whereas D-BUS is used to 
communicate between running processes.  Interoperability has a number of 
different dimensions, and concurrency/flow-of-control issues are a 
critical but often overlooked aspect of that.

On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 11:40:27AM -0500, Reed Hedges wrote:
> Lalo Martins wrote:
> 
> > Conversely, on Linux, I have long wanted to have d-bus bindings, which
> > would achieve more or less the same effect.  That is something that
> > probably will be in s5 out of the box -- you add a site extension
> > (assuming site extensions exist in s5; or whatever is the equivalent if
> > they don't), and you get d-bus, similar to how you get VIP.
> 
> Part of dbus support will have to be semantic bridging too. Either in
> the VOS site extension or in a seperate native_dbus-vos_dbus daemon;
> doing it in the site extension probably makes the most sense I think.
> So adding and removing services looks like adding/removing vobjects;
> changing the prenesce status of your avatar sends a dbus event to
> synchronize with other IM systems, etc.
> 
> Reed
> 
> _______________________________________________
> vos-d mailing list
> vos-d at interreality.org
> http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d

-- 
[   Peter Amstutz  ][ tetron at interreality.org ][ peter.amstutz at gdit.com ]
[Lead Programmer][Interreality Project][Virtual Reality for the Internet]
[ VOS: Next Generation Internet Communication][ http://interreality.org ]
[ http://interreality.org/~tetron ][ pgpkey:  pgpkeys.mit.edu  18C21DF7 ]

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://www.interreality.org/pipermail/vos-d/attachments/20070226/3e242a24/attachment.pgp