Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-04 Thread Branislav Katreniak
Hi all I am very interested to discuss and contribute to this project. Our motivation: Our qt application is split to modules written in qt and every module runs in its own process. This gives us robustness but our calls become IPC. All modules are updated at once, so there is no need for stable

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-03 Thread Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.)
Thiago wrote (in a different thread): > I think the answer is pretty clear: because there are 10 other RPC > solutions and this needs to be harmonised. > > And, to be honest, a Qt-only solution is not the most ideal. I think > we should use an RPC that is available in other toolkits. Oswald wro

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-02 Thread Matt Broadstone
On Monday, June 2, 2014, Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.) wrote: > > Are you aware of QxtRPCService as well? > > http://libqxt.bitbucket.org/doc/0.6/qxtrpcservice.html > > André, > > Nope. Didn't know about that one. It is Signals only, not Properties and > Slots as well, though. Thanks! > > Brett

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-02 Thread Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.)
> Are you aware of QxtRPCService as well? > http://libqxt.bitbucket.org/doc/0.6/qxtrpcservice.html André, Nope. Didn't know about that one. It is Signals only, not Properties and Slots as well, though. Thanks! Brett ___ Development mailing list Dev

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-02 Thread André Somers
Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.) schreef op 31-5-2014 00:57: > > I'd like to officially request a sandbox for: Replicant > > What is it? > Replicant is a Qt library for Inter Process Communication (IPC). It is meant > as an alternate to QtDBus, but with a very different usa

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-01 Thread m...@rpzdesign.com
What we really want to know Charley is whether you drive a F-150 or a Prius. That will decide whether this is a Killer App. md On 6/1/2014 9:43 PM, charleyb123 . wrote: > This cross process stuff is starting to feel like 1996 and > remote procedure RPC calls, now using QT signals and slo

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-01 Thread charleyb123 .
> > This cross process stuff is starting to feel like 1996 and > remote procedure RPC calls, now using QT signals and slots. "" > again for effect. > > One could review the history of microsoft and the fine RPC mechanisms > that turned out to be mostly unusable, or maybe just unused. > > Keep the o

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-01 Thread m...@rpzdesign.com
Bret: I am certainly open to Ford Motor Company sponsoring my flight to wherever this summit is taking place and we can dispose of the problem of my failure to attend. My talk would be titled, "How Bill Gates dreamed of using RPC to court his future yet unseen wife" Hell, that might even be qual

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-01 Thread Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.)
> This cross process stuff is starting to feel like 1996 and remote procedure > RPC > calls, now using QT signals and slots. "" again for effect. > > One could review the history of microsoft and the fine RPC mechanisms that > turned out to be mostly unusable, or maybe just unused. > > Keep the

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-01 Thread m...@rpzdesign.com
This cross process stuff is starting to feel like 1996 and remote procedure RPC calls, now using QT signals and slots. "" again for effect. One could review the history of microsoft and the fine RPC mechanisms that turned out to be mostly unusable, or maybe just unused. Keep the optimism in check

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-06-01 Thread Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.)
> I am *HUGELY* interested in this.  We do lots of IPC, and across physical > devices, > and his design issues really "hit home" for us.  Part of the reason for our > interest > is we've implemented similar things, and the "design-approach-overlap" is > uncanny.  (That's a CAN bus joke.) > … >

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-05-31 Thread charleyb123 .
(I'm just jumping in here...) Bret spaketh: > In trying to address your points, I fear it sounds like I think D-Bus is > bad. That's not > what I'm trying to say. I'm saying D-Bus/QtDBus didn't work *for my > use-case*. > So I created something that worked better *for my use-case*. > > There

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-05-30 Thread Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.)
Sorry for the formatting guys. Corporate email is Outlook, so I'm manually trying to be polite and bottom post. > Hello Brett Hi Thiago > I again support the creation of the repository. We'll have to discuss > whether this can become part of the Qt standard release because > of the overlap

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-05-30 Thread Thiago Macieira
Em sex 30 maio 2014, às 22:57:02, Stottlemyer, Brett escreveu: > I'd like to officially request a sandbox for: Replicant Hello Brett I again support the creation of the repository. We'll have to discuss whether this can become part of the Qt standard release because of the overlap in requiremen

[Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

2014-05-30 Thread Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.)
Hi list, My name is Brett Stottlemyer, here with my 2nd sandbox request. I work for Ford Motor Company, and Ford has graciously agreed to let us contribute some of the cool stuff we've developed back to Qt. We aren't quite done with everything yet (still waiting on the Corporate CLA), but I w