Re: GConf design problems?

["Hongli Lai" <hongli telekabel nl>]

(I am now on the mailing list, so don't CC me)

OK, so GConf does not store everything in one file, but rather in different
directories in ~/.gconf.
I went to Gnotices and replied to those who fear that the GConf database
will corrupt, but now they complain about that they don't want 2000
directory that will clutter their homedir (*sigh*).
(and some even told me that they can't give more details than "the GConf
daemon produces *shit*! how more DETAILED can I be?")
Others complain about that GConf will end up will zilions of backends.

Why did you guys chose for an XML backend instead of some INI-based
backend, just like KDE or gnome-config?
XML is 80% tags and 20% data (or so a friend of mine says).
And why did you decided to put everything in different directories rather
than
1 file per application?


> > I noticed that many people on Gnotices dislikes GConf.
>
> I think it is mostly one moron who has also appeared on IRC a few
> times. I think the points I've made above demonstrate that he's
> utterly clueless.

You haven't seen the ones from Gnotices. They claim that they're not
trolls,
yet they refuse to give technical details about why GConf is bad.
I thought Gnotices is fully moderated? (it is according an article at
www.freekde.org)
One of them even told me that Miguel de Icaza said that GNU and GPL is
crap, using some chatlog from 07-Aug-2001 of #gnome as "proof".
Really, you guys should take a look at Gnotices.