On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 12:33:05AM +0200, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> On Fri April 16 2004 21:56, Avi Alkalay wrote:
> > And of course, to have KConfig and GConf share the same configuration
> > infrastructure will bring to user many automatic-software-integration
> > benefits.
> >
> > Some registry-like software (mine or other) is inevitable. Traditional
> > Unix guys must put their old paradigms down. A system-wide registry-like
> > software only have benefits.
>
> I see in the near future a need for standardization in the context of
> freedesktop of certain common user preferences (mimetype activation comes to
> mind) and for that we will need to settle on a format. I think this is an
> interesting option if it is able to meet the performance requirements as well
> as certain technical requirements that both KConfig and GConf may have.
Agreed. D-BUS certainly provides interesting opportunities in this area
('hey guys, I just changed my proxy settings, deal'), and I would
strongly encourage anyone investigating a new configuration framework to
please look at D-BUS.
--
Daniel Stone <daniel freedesktop org>
freedesktop.org: powering your desktop http://www.freedesktop.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature