Return-Path: Message-Id: From: Johan Hedberg To: BlueZ development In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2) Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 23:53:40 +0300 References: <1207252447.18442.11.camel@californication> Subject: Re: [Bluez-devel] [BlueZ-Announce] Release of bluez-libs-3.30 and bluez-utils-3.30 Reply-To: BlueZ development List-Id: BlueZ development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: bluez-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: bluez-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Apr 3, 2008, at 23:37, Marc-Andr=E9 Lureau wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:54 PM, Marcel Holtmann = > wrote: >> >> After a long discussion, the consensus was to use plugins instead of >> separate processes for the future of BlueZ. This release marks the = >> start >> of this change. All existing services have been converted to plugins >> while keeping the old D-Bus API. > > I am just being curious, I'd like to know why the separate processes > approach was dropped. It isn't of course the whole story (Marcel will probably fill up with = more reasons), but the following is a table of the pros/cons of each = approach that we created couple of weeks ago when planing the 4.x = work: http://iki.fi/jhedberg/plugin-vs-process.jpg Johan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Bluez-devel mailing list Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel