Re: [gnome-db] another gda config tool

[Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>]

On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 00:42, Javier Muñoz Ferrara wrote:
> El lun, 15-07-2002 a las 21:48, Rodrigo Moya escribió:
> > On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 19:54, Gonzalo Paniagua Javier wrote:
> > > * [ Gonzalo Paniagua Javier <gonzalo gnome-db org>
> > > * Mon, 15 Jul 2002 19:35:11 +0200 ]
> > > > > We have written a tool to configure gda datasources in command-line,
> > > > > list providers, remove datasources, etc... The current gda-config-tool
> > > > > is not easy to use for us in shell scripts. I attach the source.
> > > 
> > > Well, i've taken a look at yagda. Instead of doing a separate tool that
> > > only works with command line options, i consider more appropiate to add
> > > a bugzilla entry requesting those options in gda-config-tool or even
> > > providing a patch that adds them to the tool. 
> > > 
> > yes, I also think so. The idea we have with gda-config-tool is to have it work
> > in different ways, so instead of a new tool, as Gonzalo says, it's much better
> > to integrate it with gda-config-tool.
> > 
> I will talk a bit more about yagda. While we were doing de FAQ we had
> the need of manage datasources for making tests. The first idea was to
> use gda-config-tool but we didn't know anything about what were
> "entries" and "sections". We were looking at the code, but we haven't
> idea about the format of the config file (is it gconf?). On the other
> hand, we saw many documented functions for configuring libgda
> (http://www.gnome-db.org/docs/libgda/libgda-gda-config.html) so we
> thought in making a simple program that helped us using them. Bit a bit
> we were adding more functionality (really easy, we only had to use de
> configuration functions) and popt for parsing the arguments (really
> cool!).
> 
> The internals of both programs are very diferent. While gda-config-tool
> manages the configuration file we only use the configuration functions
> of libgda. I don't know if the integration can be easy.
> 
AFAIK, gda-config-tool also uses the gda_config API

> We didn't have the need of requesting the options to be added to
> gda-config-tool because we could implement it "our way".
> 
> Yagda was only to be used by ourselves, but we thought that it would be
> a good idea to offer it to the comunity. It doesn't have the aim of
> replacing gda-config tool, it's only Yet Another GDA Config Tool :)

yet another? we didn't have one and now we've got 2 :-) Anyway, I still think
some of the things you've done in yagda coould be integrated into gda-config-tool.

cheers