Re: GConf vs. bonobo-config

[Ramiro Estrugo <ramiro fateware com>]

Martin Baulig wrote:
> 
> 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.
> 
> Exactly. Just for the record, did anyone care about this back in the GConf days ? I don't think so.
> 
> --
> Martin Baulig
>

Well, we certainly care in Nautilus, where as I said before we still use
gnome_config_ for "legacy" settings.

And yes, it complicates life and makes the user's experience less that
pleasant.  For example, for notifications we need to poll certain config
files.  This makes Nautilus more complicated and harder to maintain and
doesn't work in all cases.  I think the user needs to use the capplet in
a specific way to make it work if my memory is correct.

Not that gnome_config_ is evil or anything.  The point is that the
mixture of the 2 imcompatible systems complicates things and has a
direct.

Also, the preferences code in Nautilus at one point worked with
gnome_config.  And one day we replaced its implementation detail with
GConf.  So yes, we care alot and have been dealing with it all along.  I
hope that "being used to pain" is not a good reason for making more
pain...

Thats my bit of record, anyway...

-re