Re: Is GNOME 2 dead ?

On Wed, 2001-08-29 at 16:41, Sander Vesik wrote:
> On 29 Aug 2001, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > >   b) gnome_config_ isn't a config system, it's a .ini file parser.
> > >      not a particular evil or harmful thing. I wouldn't add it 
> > >      today, but porting all our stuff away from gnome_config_ 
> > >      is not going to happen for GNOME 2.
> > >
> > that would be really a pity. As I've said other times, I think we should
> > force people to use bonobo-conf
> > 
> > cheers
> > 
> Thous shalt eat nothing but red meat.
> I don't thing that 'forcing' idea would work.
well, I don't mean putting a gun in their head and say: "port to
bonobo-conf/GConf or I'll shoot".
In the same way, app developers are "forced" to drop imlib and use
gdk-pixbuf, also they're "half-forced" to use GObject instead of
GtkObject (half-forced because you can still use GtkObject in GNOME 2),
they're "forced" to drop m4 macros and use pkg-config, they're "forced"
to rename all their libraries to be able to install GNOME 1 and GNOME 2
versions of their libraries, and change all the headers installation
directories, etc, etc.

So, what I mean is: "here's the new super-cool configuration system for
GNOME, please use it, and drop your use of gnome_config as soon as you
can". And to help this, I would rename gnome_config to gnome_ini_file
(didn't I say that already? :-). If people want still to use
gnome_config, porting for them would just mean a

Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org> - <rodrigo ximian com> -

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