DConf configuration system

Avery Pennarun apenwarr at nit.ca
Wed Apr 6 20:31:17 EEST 2005

On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 07:10:49PM +0200, Buola Buola wrote:

> I will check this project. Anyway, I think that what we should do, is
> creating a common DBus API, then it really doesn't matter how it is
> implemented as long as the implementation works and conforms to the
> API, and we need to make the Gnome and KDE who can decider whether to
> adopt it happy with it. Once there is a DBus API spec which has all
> the functionality, we can see if the existing projects can be easily
> adapted to use it. It's not a problem if it is written in C++, as the
> DBus API will be totally language-independent.

There is already a UniConf daemon that serves over dbus and therefore meets
all these requirements.  (There's another that serves over tcp, ssl, or unix
domain sockets.  You can also operate without a daemon at all if you want.)

If people agree on a set of dbus messages that the "D" configuration system
ought to use for communication, we'll be happy to update the UniConf dbus
server to comply.  Or you could start by basing your dbus message schema on
the existing UniConf one.

Have fun,


More information about the xdg mailing list