Re: Module proposal: dconf

[Alberto Ruiz <aruiz gnome org>]

2009/10/13 Pierre Wieser <pwieser trychlos org>:
> Hi
>
> Just my 10cents piece, as I'm afraid I'm not really involved
> in the decision.
>
> As a new maintainer - about six month on nautilus-actions -
> I've already had to migrate from Gvfs to GIO, from libglade
> to GtkBuilder, and, obviously, soon from GConf to dconf.

Just a quick note, GSettings is the actual replacement for the GConf
client API, not dconf. dconf is meant to be a generic configuration
storage and is not tied to GObject in any way.

> In GIO and in GtkBuilder, I had to suffer of regressions,
> whether some api didn't exist in the new product (mostly
> uri parsing in GIO), or bugs that were not fixed before the
> migration decision (GtkBuilder: the id is no more unique
> inside of a toplevel, not even fix today - see #579345).
>
> I'm not able to estimate how much the new products are better
> that the previous ones, but I, and I think other developpers
> too, would greatly appreciate if new products had at least
> same functionalities than the one they replace.
>
> Really, guys, developpers need a minimum of stability to be
> efficient.
>
> I don't even talk of advanced users that we ask to directly
> edit their GConf system because lot of applications have
> preferences only editable through GConf editor.
>
> All, we work to build a better free desktop.
> But migrating three times in six months without any visible
> gain is a pain.
>
> Regards
> Pierre
>
> PS: and sorry for my bad english - I do my best efforts ;-)
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
>



-- 
Un saludo,
Alberto Ruiz