Kameda-san,
Daisuke Kameda wrote:
>
> I also agree with re-using something already there.
> But it is politically difficult to choose QtDBus, ORBit, XPCOM, or UNO,
> I think.
Yep, might be. Though I am sure you are certainly thinking about the
technical terms as well.
>
> So, I decided to make Common Desktop Infrastructure based on D-BUS.
What a shame. I would have loved to see Uno there ... though I believe
you have your reasons.
>
>
>>> In the first place, in now opensource desktop community, is selecting
>>> one component technology possible?
>>
>> I don't see a reason why not.
>
> If one component model is chosen, other project developers feel to
> be controled by using the component model via bridge. Even if nobody
> means it.
I am not sure I understand you correctly, IMHO a component model does
not control anybody, especially wrt your project, it just does enable
inter-operation ... so it is feature :-)
>
> This is the reason which I considered.
>
> Regards,
Kay
--
Sun Microsystems GmbH Kay Ramme
Sachsenfeld 4 Senior Technical Architect
20097 Hamburg Phone: (+49 40) 23646 982
Germany Fax: (+49 40) 23646 550
http://www.sun.com/staroffice mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.sun.com/openoffice
http://udk.openoffice.org
Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1, D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
Amtsgericht München: HRB 161028
Geschäftsführer: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Bömer
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Häring
_______________________________________________
Desktop_architects mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop_architects
