Configuration API

Lars Hallberg spam at
Sun May 2 11:48:47 EEST 2004

Baris Metin wrote:

>In my opinion, a configuration system/API must be system wide. But I
>don't think all software developers will accept a unique system/API
>easyly. So maybe, regular configuration files can also be a backend?
All apps don't need to use the API to read ther config, but ther need to 
be a backend for ther config format so config tools can read and change 
the configuration!

If this API get som use, say Gnome and KDE, app authors might start 
providing and updating ther backends, regarless if they use the backends 
themself for reading ther config - just to integrate nicly with the 
'standar' config tools!

The benefit from using the API in the app is that it becoms easy to 
replase the config format or switch between lokal file store and network 
config deamons. When a set of solid implementations exists, it will 
probably be natural chose for *new* apps. But only apps needing som 
extra features like notification is likly to *change* to use the API. 
Stuff lika postfix, bind and apache is not likly to be first in line to 
cross over :-)

I think it is important to have the same API in two positions. Between a 
backend for a given fileformat (or whatever) and a config deamon/app 
*and* between the config deamon and config tools/app (or rather, between 
the config tool/app and the library talking to the config deamon). That 
way You can bypass the config deamon and directly use the backend for a 
given fileformat. That may be needed for robustnes or on system wher no 
config deamon runs/is not started yet when the config needs to be readed!


More information about the xdg mailing list