Re: GConf vs. bonobo-config

>    Michael, if your stance on Gnome is that coding the core system
> using C API is bad then I have the feeling there is a significant gap
> between your view and what I thought was the technical directions of
> the Gnome project. I understand that developing applications is better
> done using Bonobo, but I disagree with your opinion that it's the right
> API level for something as basic and core as a configuration system.

I do not think you understand.

Lets compare both GConf and Bonobo-Conf in this particular case:

				GConf		Bonobo-Conf
Requires non-local daemon	yes		yes

Uses CORBA to talk to deamon	yes		yes

Is CORBA interface public	no		yes

Uses standard CORBA iface	no		yes (Bonobo/PropertyBag)

Has "simple" C API		yes		yes

Is it a "new" API		yes		same as PropertyBag.

Requires wrapping for		yes		requires CORBA binding
other languages

When I say above "Same as PropertyBag" it means that the API to use
Bonobo-Conf is the same API you would use to set, load and configure
properties in Bonobo (for example in Bonobo Controls, and is the same
stuff Glade uses for setting properties).


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