RE: config library. Was GNOME registry
- From: bob smith <bob kehs ksd org>
- To: Rene Mayrhofer <rmayr vianova at>
- cc: Rowan van der Molen <bigsmoke usa net>, gnome-list gnome org
- Subject: RE: config library. Was GNOME registry
- Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 23:55:17 -0800 (PST)
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.
> >><http://www.thestuff.net/libcfg>http://www.thestuff.net/libcfg
> 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outdated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 http://www.gnome.org/gnomefaq
> To unsubscribe: mail gnome-list-request@gnome.org with
> "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
>
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]