Re: GConf vs. bonobo-config

[Cody Russell <bratsche gnome org>]

On 16 Jun 2001 03:24:29 +0200, Zbigniew Chyla wrote:
> On Sat, 2001-06-16 at 02:46:56, Martin Baulig wrote:
> 
> > With GNOME 2, there are no "non-component based apps", Bonobo is integral part of the
> > platform, so you always have bonobo-config in your app.
> 
> Hmm... AFAIR GConf was supposed to be desktop/toolkit/component system/...
> independent configuration engine for *NIX systems. It could be used in KDE
> and probably in some other projects. *NIX sysadmins always dreamt of such
> thing (unified configuration database).
> Do you think that KDE and others will use Bonobo in the future?

Does KDE use GConf now?  Did they say they are going to use it?  Not
that I'm aware of.  I really don't think this is an issue now.

What is an issue, as far as I can tell, is simply the magical appearance
of new stuff to replace old stuff without discussion.  I can't argue the
technicalities between GConf and bonobo-config, but they're not relevant
to my complaint.  It seems to me that bonobo-config came out of nowhere
and is suddenly the official replacement for GConf.

Yes, I saw the announcements for bonobo-conf, the GConf wrapper.  I
don't remember ever seeing anything about bonobo-config, though, and I
certainly never saw anyone say, "Hey, we think GConf sucks and this is
why.  We are prepared to implement a new library that will fix these
defficiencies.  What do you all think?"  That would have been an
invitation for discussion, not for flammage.

This particular library change doesn't trenendously affect me,
personally, but I still feel that discussion could have been done more
openly.  This is the only thing I'm concerned with.



--
Cody Russell, bratsche gnome org
http://grue.zork.org/~bratsche/