Re: GConf vs. bonobo-config

[Martin Baulig <martin home-of-linux org>]

Glynn Foster <glynn foster sun com> writes:

> But this is something that was never discussed before.....What happens after gnome_config_*??
> And this is as important as providing backward compatibility with gtk...Is there a similar
> backward compatibility for bonobo-config [and I assume by the question that there is]??

This is also quite funny. I do not remember that anyone cared about backwards compatibility when
GConf was initially added to the GNOME 1.x platform. It seemed quite natural for me that we were
switching to a new configuration scheme and that we can't read/write the old config with it.

> As Ramiro said, user's don't care diddly-squat about what configuration mechanism they use, so
> long as their panel configuration provides the launchers that they want to see, that nautilus
> still preserves the config they've set up....
> 
> The longer two configuration mechanism exist, with incompatibility, the more harmful effect it 
> will have on the end user....and you could say 'fuck developers, users are the group that 
> *matter*', and I couldn't agree more.

Exactly. Just for the record, did anyone care about this back in the GConf days ? I don't think so.

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