A draft for a standard for desktop configuration
Philip Van Hoof
spam at pvanhoof.be
Mon Sep 12 22:41:47 EEST 2005
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 21:06 +0200, Christian Neumair wrote:
> First of all: Thanks for working on this. It's nice that finally we're
> fleshing something out.
True. And no problem. If this will make people (finally) work together
on shareable or interopable solutions for shared desktop developer
problems, it would even justify me getting psychologically damaged cause
of working on it :p.
If we have one extreme big problem in the opensource community, it's the
NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome. All the teams (call them kde, gnome or
whatever) are reimplementing everything from scratch every time and for
every simple problem. This way we aren't creating "usable" desktop
environments for our "users".
We need to cooperate. On most levels. Hence my reasoning for working on
(End of my philosophical rant)
> I would like to suggest to learn of GConf's memory consumption issues:
> Do not translate the key desciptings inline, i.e. inside the XML files
> with simple lang attributes. It will be a memory hog for translations
> into a few dozen languages, and will significantly slow down parsing.
> Either add org_foo_bar.langcode.schemas files, or optionally add support
> for <gettextdomain> and a <gettextdirectory> nodes specifying a gettext
> catalog to look up translations.
I like the idea and I understand the problem. If you can provide me with
samples and/or adjust the proposal that would be great.
> The former approach has the disadvantage that you may potentially have
> node mismatches, so I'd prefer the latter.
Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend
home: me at pvanhoof dot be
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org
work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be
http://www.pvanhoof.be - http://www.x-tend.be
More information about the xdg