RE: GNOME registry

["Fox, Kevin M" <kmfox bhi010 bhi-erc com>]

Well, the library would be like PAM. Since most programs use PAM now,
someone convinced them it would be a better way of doing it. A universal
config abstraction library, If implemented well, would actually save
programmers time. They wouldn't have to program config file loading/saving
code. Having such a library doesn't relate to GNOME. It would be a universal
registry, not just a GNOME registry.

There could be a caplet for the library written allowing for easily changing
settings, kinda like an LDAP tool where you can surf through the settings.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	bratsche@dfw.net [SMTP:bratsche@dfw.net]
> Sent:	Thursday, December 31, 1998 11:30 AM
> To:	Fox, Kevin M
> Cc:	Rowan van der Molen; 'gnome-list@gnome.org'
> Subject:	RE: GNOME registry
> 
> 
> It would be handy to be able to configure everything from one location.
> To this end, I would love to have something like a control-center capplet
> to configure them someday. But Apache, sendmail, and all the other
> programs we're used to using already have standard locations for storing
> their data and your chances of persuading the authors or maintainers of
> those to optionally store their data in the GNOME registry is 0% or very
> close. =)
> I think making requests such as these from GNOME is asking too much.
> However, making a GNOMEified configuration program or capplet or something
> would be cool. I don't know enough about either sendmail or Apache
> configuration to even be useful in helping something like that, but if you
> do I'm sure it would be appreciated by many.
> 
> Cody
> 
> On Thu, 31 Dec 1998, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
> 
> > All I am saying, is if we want to implament something like the registry,
> it
> > would be "a good thing" to be able to configure sendmail, ftp, apache,
> and
> > other non gnome programs the same way. A standard "everything" config
> > library would work well for this.
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:	bratsche@dfw.net [SMTP:bratsche@dfw.net]
> > > Sent:	Thursday, December 31, 1998 12:24 AM
> > > To:	Rowan van der Molen
> > > Subject:	RE: GNOME registry
> > > 
> > > 
> > > You've got to be kidding. They obviously can't PREVENT non-GNOME
> > > applications from reading the registry. But wtf would another
> application
> > > WANT to mess with the registry? I think this 'this feature should be
> in
> > > the operating system rather than GNOME' line of thinking is sort of
> > > impractical. Furthermore, I believe GNOME shouldn't be going around
> the
> > > system creating things that aren't obviously GNOME-related; otherwise
> > > you're going to end up with a lot of apparent garbage and I think
> that's
> > > something that we'd all like to do without.
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 31 Dec 1998, Rowan van der Molen wrote:
> > > 
> > > > >I think somthing like this needs to be a system wide thing, not
> just
> > > GNOME.
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, I will kill all the GNOME developers pesonally if they are
> going to
> > > > implement something
> > > > usable for GNOME only.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > >         FAQ: Frequently-Asked Questions at
> http://www.gnome.org/gnomefaq
> > > >          To unsubscribe: mail gnome-list-request@gnome.org with 
> > > >                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > >         FAQ: Frequently-Asked Questions at
> http://www.gnome.org/gnomefaq
> > >          To unsubscribe: mail gnome-list-request@gnome.org with 
> > >                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
> >