Re: Window Focus

[Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam whitemice org>]

On Sun, 2011-12-04 at 20:26 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Gantry York
> <gantry york digitascio com> wrote:
>         I think if you make it hidden enough, it appears to be removed
>         functionality.
>         So after a little reading, I figured out that I have to
>         install gconf-editor
>         OK, I get it.  It's like the Windows Registry.

You rarely have to use it directly thanks to the awesome
gnome-tweak-tool.

I admit I'm a bit puzzled why I have to keep pointing tweak tool out to
people... it is blogged about all over and installed by default on most
distros.

> It is NOTHING like the windows registry.  GConf is simply a key/value
> pair with some magic to detect changes.

+1 

I THANK THE GNOME PTBs for GConf/DConf!  THANK YOU. PLEASE PLEASE NEVER
AGAIN LET ME HAVE TO DEAL WITH A TRILLION APPLICATION SPECIFIC
CONFIGURATION FILES SCATTERED IN THOUSANDS OF DOT FILES EVER AGAIN.

THANK YOU!  GCONF RULEZ!

If anyone wants to criticize GConf they should pose an alternative
solution that (a) doesn't look like a registry [GConf is, essentially, a
registry (hierarchical key/value database) - and I have no problem with
that] and (b) doesn't completely *SUCK*.

>   I hate when peopel compare it with the windows regsitry.
> GConf/GSettings and everything else is just a pragmatic way to do to
> settings. 

+1

> Sorry, I get really irritated when I see GConf compared to the windows
> settings and have it's negativity applied to GConf.

... and as a sys-admin with several hundred Windows boxes...  I haven't
seen registry corruption in years.  So it is a 'trival untruth' on all
platforms; regardless of what you think of GConf.  At least it is an
anachronism.