Re: GConf debate ... the hermenutical key.

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

Michael Meeks <michael ximian com> writes:
> 	b) Why the Bonobo-conf design is disliked by the Gtk+ team.
.... 
> 	This for me is the key to understanding what I will call the
> 'RedHat' position:
> 

Fuck you Michael. Many people neither at Red Hat nor on the GTK team
have posted here. Moreover Red Hat the company could give two shits
about this.  I am speaking for myself only. I have not accused Dietmar
of being part of any conspiracies or corporately-motivated whatever.

Your little rant here is wholly wrong. The issue is not whether Bonobo
sucks. The issue is not whether bonobo-config sucks. The issue is that
a wrapper would have worked, it's what we agreed on, and someone went
off and unilaterally did whatever they wanted anyway with ZERO
benefit. The only benefit of bonobo-config thus far posted that
wouldn't apply to a wrapper is "code cleanup" - now is that worth an
incompatible solution that ruins the sysadmin benefits of the config
system? Especially considering that a "code cleanup" for GConf could
be done in-place without breaking anything?

If you want people to use Bonobo (and you're awfully insecure about
that), why don't you focus on removing the complaints they have
instead of on forcing people to use it by fiat and
reimplementing/destabilizing code left and right.

Havoc