subbed EventBus for Otto in third-party libs doc

[weathersboyle]

No description provided.

[f2rf2r]

We should removegenerally, the event bus should only be used when a traditional interface is inadequate or cumbersome, event bus shouldn't be used simply as way of avoiding passing callbacks

[weathersboyle]

right, I know that's your position, and I generally agree with you; I don't oppose removing it. Are there any cases where you want strong decoupling, for which you'd entertain the idea of using the bus? The service-activity/fragment example is popular, but you can certainly connect to the service and treat it like an interface, though that connection step is async

[f2rf2r]

It would then be a matter of how many activities can be bound to a service. If multiple activities are listening for the service and/or the service is not bound to any particular activity, the event bus would be appropriate. However, if the service should only be active when a certain activity is active, then a connection interface would be better.

[brightredchilli]

Hi @weathersboyle, @f2rf2r, just restarting this convo here - is there a common denominator of an edit from this conversation? It seems like the change from Otto to EventBus is certainly helpful. While I do think that the 'generally' statement is a bit redundant, I don't think it's so bad. After all, when an interface is inadequate or cumbersome is totally up to the developer. There is no bad recommendation here per se.