[Registry] Re: LinuxRegistry in Freedesktop & KDE
c.gatzemeier at tu-bs.de
Tue Apr 20 01:34:07 EEST 2004
Am Montag, 19. April 2004 22:15 schrieb Avi Alkalay:
> The idea is not to edit tiny text files. Actually you guys should stop
> thinking in this tiny files.
> Start thinking in a namespace. And then forget it again.
Exactly, and then suddenly the one key-value per file registry becomes
unnecessary and seems to only get in the way.
> The LR's idea is to provide a consistent infrastructure to let creation
> of apps' configuration UI to be as easy as 1-2-3.
[SSL config negative example]
> Clearly, LR is not the solution for this. But providing a programatically
> easy way to change software parameters will make high level UI
> configuration software appear and consolidate in Linux distributions.
> This is a change on how users use the Linux desktop.
Frankly, this sounds as if you suggest all the tools that are around today
couldn't exist without LR. The problem is to make the config diversity
manageable more easily in a smart way.
Have you looked into the other concepts for configuration handling? No one is
saying you should stop experimenting with LR or start coding for libconf,
cfg, webmin or any other, however you also said LR alone won't fix the
situation, and I might add, it is not even strictly necessary for making Free
Software easy to configure, which I guess was your main goal to begin with.
To change how configuration of GNU/Linux systems is done in the world, my
conclusion would be to investigate the options for the ecosystem part you
talked about. There not only one config format (most are easy to parse
anyway) can be unified with semantic (meta-config) information.
More information about the xdg