Re: GConf and bonobo-conf

Colm Smyth wrote:

> Bonobo-conf can naturally read and write any CORBA_Any because it
> doesn't care about type or content.  If GNOME applications can write
> version-dependent binary information into GConf, users will have a lot
> of difficulty upgrading.  Since GNOME development is fast and we want
> to keep adding new features, we don't want to be stuck with
> version-compatibility issues, or worse we don't want to write specific
> code to migrate users from one application version to the next!
> It also means that the data is unreadable by other applications
> unless they use the same data-structure (and the same version).

Ok, once again: The goal of bonobo-conf is not to store everything
as binary data. If you restrict yourself to the basic types used by
GConf the values are even stored in the native GConf format - no
binary data at all ;-)

> If you write configuration data as primitive values, you get the
> following advantages:
> - application transparency; other applications can easily read and
>   write the data

read/write is not problem, even if you use CORBA_any. The real
problem is if you want to modify values. We have PropertyEditors
for that.

> - easier upgrade; most changes to data structures are additions and
>   this creates no upgrade problems as new applications can continue
>   to read the existing configuration information

> - easy to edit; users will be able to use the GConf tools to change values;
>   gconftool can display and edit values, and the upcoming Gtk+-based gconfedit
>   application will also be able to browse, display and edit GConf.

I think "PropertyEditors" as used in bonobo-conf are better and even
easier to use.

- Dietmar

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]