Re: About GNOME 2.0 - The end of a dream

Havoc Pennington wrote:

> Dietmar Maurer <dietmar ximian com> writes:
> > Summary: We simply got the deep impression that you are not interested in
> > changing anything, and that is why we started bonobo-config.
> >
> So what you are saying is: you don't agree with me, so you wrote your
> own thing. Fair enough. I respect your right to write a thing.

bonobo-config is more than a database backend.

> The issue is that we can't just agree to disagree, we have to mutually
> agree on the default database. Or at least, someone has to decide.

I thought that we already aggreed on using the "gconf" wrapper, or do we still
have a problem here?

> So what I'm asking is, given that I don't agree with you, what was I
> supposed to do? Your reply says "I should change my code" - but I
> didn't agree that was the right thing to do.
> i.e. you are suggesting that the solution to disagreement is that I
> agree with you. ;-) That makes no sense.


> Given that we don't agree, how could we have resolved the issue?

I think we agree on most things. The only problem I see is the implementation
of GConf. You have already explained why you have done it that way, and I have
showed a way to make it better.

IMHO I would like to have a fully compatible "gconf:" moniker, implemented
using the bonobo-config framework. Maybe someone writes such thing someday.
But anyway, you don't think thats the way to go and we disagree here, but I
can live with that disagreement.

- Dietmar

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