micke at imendio.com
Fri Mar 4 09:03:17 PST 2005
Philip Van Hoof wrote:
If the only thing you intend to do is to rename the namespace for the
sake of removing the 'g' it sounds like a really stupid thing to do
since it will break all existing users of GConf, including all GNOME
applications just for the sake of pleasing some non-hacker kid.
Since KDE will wrap this in some C++ layer anyway they can easily "hide"
the 'g' in the API in their wrapping layer if that's an issue. And
seriously, renaming things to get rid of a G just is silly.
If that is what stands in the way of KDE using it I don't think they
really want to use it anyway. I mean, for the people that will make
decisions in KDE I doubt it matters since they will look at the
technical part of it.
So, instead of proposing decorational changes I would suggest you
started lobbying to see:
1) If KDE is even interested in changing their configuration framework,
and if so,
2) If they are interested in changing to GConf, or
3) Work on a proposal that would be accepted by both KDE and GNOME.
Imendio AB, http://www.imendio.com/
More information about the dbus