RE: config library. Was GNOME registry

Well, as for a configuration program, it should be like nwadmin. Most of
you dont have much experiance with Netware, but it is by far the most easy
to use configuration program. It contains a list of objects, sorted out
like a list of your hard drive. When you double click on an object, it
pops up with a page of properties that you can change. 

On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, Rene Mayrhofer wrote:

> At 09:34 02.01.99 +0100, Rowan van der Molen wrote:
> >At 12:35 1-01-99 -0800, you wrote:
> >>I have put up a page.
> >><>
> Wonderful
> Maybe we should try to get an own mailing list to.
> >>> >Such a library would be wonderful if all programs used it. It is very
> >>> >important that the library should offer the possibility to store the data
> >>> >in text files (maybe with an appropriate directory structure).
> >>> At this point my little XML idea might come in handy or won't it?
> I like the idea of using XML for a text file storage.
> >I think that you might very easily make a program which puts a nice lay-out
> >on your screen in which you can change your XML config files which can
> >than be converted to the appropriate plain text config files through XSL or
> >made
> >available through a nice CORBA or library api.
> >If we use XML for our config files it might be very easy to make a nice
> >configuration
> >manager by just making it an XML/XSL frond-end. 
> I know that most people won't like this, but I think such a tool would be
> (in a way) similiar to the Windows regedit. That would make it easy for
> Windows sysadmins.
> But the big advantage of XML config files would be that you do not NEED to
> use the tool. That is something I always hated about the Windows registry.
> >I think that you simply can't program a GUI configuration program for every
> >single
> >program which appears and even if you would succeed with that, it would be
> >outdated 
> >and old-fashioned before it's even downloaded.
> Exactly.
> >Instead of that you can simply declare the rules for writing config files for
> >the program 
> >and the program (XSL processor) can wirte the config files for you. 
> >This way you could even go so far that the end-user doesn't even need to know
> >what 
> >programs he's running under the shell of his beautifull configuration
> >program. 
> >He sets the background and the background changes but he doesn't even need to
> >know
> >what WM he's running because the program writes the appropriate config file
> >for
> >it ;-)
> Would be nice.
> >I like abstraction
> I like abstraction too.
> I think that we could provide a very high level of abstraction to the
> programmer because speed is not important. The only disadvantage of
> abstraction is speed. 
> A central configuration library would be a big step for the UNIX world.
> -- 
>         FAQ: Frequently-Asked Questions at
>          To unsubscribe: mail with 
>                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.

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