Mapping form factor

[Robby Workman]

On Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:55:54 -0400
David Zeuthen <david at fubar.dk> wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 16:43 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > So, would a "is-laptop" property make more sense? 
> 
> No, no, no. You are conflating policy with the form-factor here. You
> are trying to be "helpful" but not realizing it's having the opposite
> effect. That's what I've been trying to say all along.
> 
> To repeat myself: it is _fundamentally_ wrong to expose such
> properties because it leads to bad software. Software that tries to
> be "clever" about what behavior should be the default by making
> decisions for the poor user. Software that acts and feels
> unpredictable.
> 
> The way you need to design your software is
> 
>  a) use standard configuration systems like e.g. GConf


GConf is not "standard" at all.  If the goal is desktop-neutrality
(which it should be, IMHO), then GConf should be out of the equation
completely.  If it's optional, that's fine, but *requiring* it is just
wrong IMO.

-RW
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/devkit-devel/attachments/20090702/a29d42a9/attachment.pgp