Re: Module proposal: dconf

[Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>]

On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 07:54 -0400, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 13:12 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
> >> Le mardi 13 octobre 2009, à 00:16 -0500, Diego Escalante Urrelo a écrit :
> >> > El lun, 12-10-2009 a las 11:33 -0400, Ryan Lortie escribió:
> >> > > Hello
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 17:30 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
> >> > > > Le lundi 12 octobre 2009, à 11:27 -0400, Ryan Lortie a écrit :
> >> > > > > I'd like to propose the inclusion of dconf for GNOME 2.30 in the
> >> > > > > desktop release set.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > No.
> >> > >
> >> > > Pretty please?
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > No.
> >> >
> >> > Diego (who is not even an r-t member but wanted to be part of the fun)
> >>
> >> Heh :-)
> >>
> >> Ryan is a bit sad to not get feedback on his proposal, so a bit more
> >> seriously: I think what we probably need is a migration plan. Should we
> >> move all the code from gconf to dconf in one cycle (if possible)? Should
> >> apps implement migration for the data in gconf? etc.
> >>
> > I think it makes sense to do the migration for all the apps at once.
> > Also, the migration from gconf can be done directly from dconf, the
> > first time it starts, or even it could be clever enough to synchronize
> > changes from gconf every time it starts, to cover apps that migrate to
> > dconf later. That would remove the apps' responsibility to do the
> > migration, which would be a lot of code to have that in all
> > applications.
> 
> I was thinking that too, given the time required for bindings to catch
> up for Mono and Python apps, but doing a migration from gconf on each
> login would cancel out one of the main benefits of dconf: improved
> performance at login (if I understand the wiki correctly).
> 
well, change "at login" with "at idle times", but I think it makes sense
to have dconf do the migration