Re: About GNOME 2.0 - The end of a dream

[Dietmar Maurer <dietmar ximian com>]

Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

> On 16Jun2001 06:43PM (-0400), Havoc Pennington wrote:
> >
> > Martin, a) this issue is already resolved
>
> I hate to pour more potential fuel on the fire, and I've been trying
> to stay out of this as much as possible, but...
>
> I guess it's not totally clear to me that the issue is resolved. It
> seems that everyone agrees that gnome-libs should use gconf as the
> back-end to store it's settings (which can be achieved either by using
> the bonobo-config API with the GConf moniker or using the GConf API
> directly). I think there are still two open issues:
>
> * Should gnome-libs use bonobo-config, or GConf directly? I guess this
> is really only an implementation detail so I think it doesn't matter
> much except for unnecessary runtime dependencies.

Using the PropertyBag interface has the advantage of a single API to
access configuration data.

> * Should bonobo-config support changing to a non-GConf database? If it
> does this, we run the risk of fragmenting configuration mechanisms,
> with different apps able to access different sets of settings, and
> breaking the sysadmin single point of control that GConf is intended
> to provide. I would really like to see all config back ends available
> through either the GConf API or the bonobo-config API, and centrally
> configured in one place. I think this is a wortwhile feature, and I
> don't see what the non-GConf back ends add that outweighs it. If there
> are performance concerns, I'm pretty sure Havoc will fix GConf as
> necessary in response to problem reports that include profile data.

I think GConf needs some internal cleanup, because the code was written a
long time ago and does not use any of the nice features we have now. For
example CORBA_any or the event source interface, or monikers. We have
made bonobo-config in order to show that there are other ways to
implement it. So I would prefer to merge the good things in GConf with
the good things in bonobo-config. IMHO that is the way to go.

- Dietmar



>
>
> How do people feel about these two issues?
>
> Regards,
>
> Maciej
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-hackers mailing list
> gnome-hackers gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers


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