[Registry] Re: LinuxRegistry in Freedesktop & KDE

[Daniel M. Lambea]

C. Gatzemeier said:
>> Firstly, a common config editing software
>> for whatever you want, in key-by-key or linear mode (or whatever mode
>> we wanted).
>
> LR like any other backend is unrelated to that, it doesn't provide
> editing  software nor information

  That's clear, IMHO. It is the editor's task to give you the visual ease
of use. LR is just trying to clean the configuration mess, while
proposing a lightweight solution with several advantages and
disadvantages.

> and to just mimic a key-value registry in filesystem doesn't take you
> too far.

  The idea of using filesystem to do that makes use of several features of
(I think) ReiserFS, which is very good in handling small files, in
accessing them, while not impacting large files. Therefore, the
key-value registry, mapped onto ReiserFS, is just a sort of natural
association.

> You're probably thinking about something that looks similar to this?:
> http://config4gnu.sourceforge.net/screenshots

  Yes, pretty similar to what I was trying to express. :-)
  Thanks for the link!  :-)

> If I look into install stuff I understand that the common packet
> management  systems around are superior to some company's, only good
> enough to sell,  ".dll hell shield".

  Well, to be honest I don't think ".dll hell" has something to do with
configuration and installation, apart from the natural relation to it.
Installing software with not a single ".dll" falls under the same
category. We can blame that system for having the ".dll hell", but we
must admit the available software is by far much more numerous. I'm not
speaking on quality of the third-party software. I'm speaking on
focusing things. For Macromedia (as an example) it's much more important
to focus on a brand new Flash Editor for Linux, rather than the
installer they would have to code. And then, the package management
systems comes into scene: Macromedia won't want to make a dozen of
different packages for dozens of different systems, just to realize that
there are a hundred of systems out of scope.

  They would love a "third-party whatever" (put your preferred package
management software, or installer, or...) that simply gets their
software and it's able to put onto end-user's home directory and to make
it run. Something like Java WebStart (but not necessarily tied to the
web). I'm not speaking about ".so" dependencies (which also exists in
other OSes). The installer might tell you that in advance, so you can go
to the library's homepage and try to install it as well. I'm focusing in
the ability for an hipotetic installer to get system-wide, valid
information, in a common, stantard way.

> -  It's not about copying other os's things, it's about  superior
> solutions. Synaptic and autopackage might be an example. That is  cool
> stuff.

  ... as far as your system understand apt repositories. I can't see
"Macromedia repositories", as well as another thousand companies'
repositories. Anyways, that "cool stuff" is still needing some kind of
superuser intervention. My point is that of course that those platforms
are cool stuff. But cool stuff for you and for me. Not for my brother,
who only wants to install Linux games in his home account without
learning Linux administration.

> Complainig how hard compiling
> might be for a user to update  something is also not very correct

  I don't complain. I just present you the story. NVidia's driver
installer compiles it for you, in case your system has no precompiled
"cool-stuff" packages. Then it asks you to "please" change the X
server's config, because "the installer cannot do it". It simply lacks
knowledge.

> because that is an option he just doesn't  have with proprietary
> shrinkwraped software copies ("products").

  I love my system as it is by now. But "conquering the desktop" means
lowering our high-tech systems to the user's hand. At least, a bit. And
to allow companies to make money with it. Otherwise, it won't work.
Making things harder for companies won't be good.

> Before going into a "all for LR" mode we should look around, and value
> what is there.

  You are right. CFG looks interesting for me as well, since it focuses my
concerns. I will take a look. Thanks for the link, again! :-)

  Regards,
    Daniel M. Lambea