Re: GConf and bonobo-config - some ideas

Dietmar Maurer <dietmar ximian com> writes:
> Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > I guess the hard thing to implement is "attaching" the schema name to
> > a key; I don't know that this is required, maybe it isn't. As I said a
> > /schemas/<key> convention is already encouraged by the GConf manual.
> >
> > I'm not clear on exactly what you're asking maybe...
> >
> I simply don't want to expose a special schema API to clients, thats all.

I'm not sure you need the function:

 attach_schema_name_to_config_key("/foo/bar", "/schemas/foo/bar")

It depends on whether you want to support dynamic keys. I don't think
I have a strong opinion on this.

I do think you a schema datatype is a good idea, I feel fairly
strongly about that. Add to the list of stuff it contains the
per-display/per-session/per-machine hints I just brought up, in
addition to default values, etc.


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