Summary: | dbus tutorial should not document deprecated dbus-glib API | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | dbus | Reporter: | Jussi Kukkonen [inactive] <jussi.kukkonen> |
Component: | core | Assignee: | Simon McVittie <smcv> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | D-Bus Maintainers <dbus> |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | medium | CC: | msniko14, smcv |
Version: | 1.5 | Keywords: | patch |
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | review? | ||
i915 platform: | i915 features: | ||
Attachments: | dbus-tutorial: replace the entire GLib section with "use GDBus" |
Description
Jussi Kukkonen [inactive]
2009-11-17 02:24:59 UTC
(dbus/doc is a dead project; documentation that lives in dbus.git is dbus/core. Reassigning.) It's wrong that there's a file in dbus.git referring to dbus-glib APIs at all, really; it should just point to some dbus-glib document. I'm tempted to replace the entire dbus-glib section of the tutorial with "Use GDBus instead"... In dbus-glib, there is not necessarily a bidirectional mapping between D-Bus types and GObject types. Several D-Bus types have more than one GObject type: for instance, D-Bus arrays can be mapped to either GList or GPtrArray. I believe dbus-glib also accepts proxies and possibly exported objects as object path arguments, and converts them into their object path? (Or possibly it was meant to do that once, but that was never implemented.) When mapping from D-Bus into GLib types with no particular type information, for instance in a variant, the default is indeed to use DBUS_TYPE_G_OBJECT_PATH. Created attachment 106056 [details] [review] dbus-tutorial: replace the entire GLib section with "use GDBus" Also provide links to relevant GLib and Qt documentation. (In reply to comment #1) > I'm tempted to > replace the entire dbus-glib section of the tutorial with "Use GDBus > instead"... Here's a patch to do so. I intend to apply this in a couple of weeks if there is no positive or negative review. (In reply to Simon McVittie from comment #4) > I intend to apply this in a couple of weeks if there is no positive or > negative review. Done, for 1.9.2 |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.