Re: My vision of gnome-libs (was Re: GNOME 2.0 meeting summary)

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com>]

Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com> writes:

> Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com> writes:
> > Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com> writes:
> > 
> > > Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com> writes: 
> > > > When I was playing with this long ago, it looked like some of it would
> > > > involve substantial time investment - it's kind of hard to rewrite
> > > > something that checks a preference on startup into something that can
> > > > change that preference at any arbitrary time.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Which is not to say it shouldn't be done, just once again that I think
> > > the cleanups of existing stuff will take months, quite aside from
> > > adding any new features.
> > > 
> > 
> > I sure don't like the sound of "two years from now" as the timetable
> > for when GConf will be fully deployed though.
> > 
> 
> What I was trying to say is that "deploying GConf is a cleanup we can
> do now."
> 

Ah, now if only you felt the same way about gnome-vfs or bonobo. :-)
To some of us, an app that only works on the local file system is as
much of a bug as one that uses gnome-config.

However, in the case of gnome-vfs it seems fairly sensible to me to
have a new vfs-widgets module that includes gnome-vfs-enhanced
versions of existing widgets, or entirely new ones, since it could be
a long term project. The ones in libgnomeui can be deprecated whenever
the new ones are ready to be part of the platform.

_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers