Re: Getting libgnome* into shape

On 29 Aug 2001, Martin Baulig wrote:

[snip - libgnome1compat]

> > There are two pieces of API which are just as applicable to if you use GConf
> > or if you're using bonobo_config with the gconf monicker.  (or not, they're
> > just for getting paths).  They could be for all I care dropped as well.
> > Else, it's actually bonobo-conf that's adding API to libgnome*, not the other
> > way around.  And I can't see a reason for removing that.  Though I suppose it
> > would make a lot more sense to make that initialization optional.  So that
> > only people that use it actually init it.
> You added an explicit GConf dependency to all GNOME 2 applications - that's different to
> the implicit dependency through bonobo-config which we had before.

Does it matter? I mean *REALLY* matter? We can all argue about this until
the Sun becomes a red giant, but i remain extremely unconvinced it is an
issue we ned to have large discussions and arguments over.

	a) application authors like gconf and use apps that use them,
	   an no amount of bonobo-config pushing in libgnome will change 
	b) the like bonobo-config and will use it anyways, whatever
	   libgnome might do 

So it's largely un extremely unimportant minor detail definately not worth
any of the fanfare and time spent on it.

> -- 
> Martin Baulig
> martin gnome org (private)
> baulig suse de (work)


I haven't been vampired. You've been Weatherwaxed.

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