DConf configuration system

[Chris Lee]

Avery Pennarun wrote:
> It's simple: because it doesn't *mean* anything if UniConf is adopted as the
> XDG configuration system.  It would be more meaningful if UniConf were
> adopted as either the KDE or Gnome configuration system; then, because it
> has neither a G nor a K in its name, we could conceivably try to convince
> the opposite project that they want to use it too.  But the fact is that
> neither KDE or Gnome has any particular interest in changing their
> configuration system right now; what they have is good enough for most
> people.
> 
> In any case, people who want to do so can use UniConf with either KDE *or*
> Gnome or both; in a sense, there is no switching needed.
> 
> The real question is: what is the problem we are trying to solve by creating
> an XDG standard for this?

Ah, and that's the fun part. See, it turns out, this is a solution in 
search of a problem.

Basically, it appears that certain people have decided it would be a 
good idea to start taking GNOME applications and pushing them up the 
stack - like GConf.

And I quote:
'You will not sell "GConf" to the KDE people. I very convinced it just
wont happen. I am, however, convinced that you MIGHT sell "DConf". While
it will indeed be "exactly" the same.'

Zack already pointed out how stupid this is, but let me reiterate since 
nobody else from KDE seems to have checked in on this (and nobody from 
GNOME has had the balls to step up and point out that this is stupid and 
pointless, at least not in public). We don't need this.

GConf is cool, and I'm glad that GNOME has it. It's great for them. It 
doesn't have the same features that KConfig has, and renaming it to 
DConf or D-Conf or anything similar is NOT going to make it more 
attractive to us. It's not going to fix the lack of Kiosk-mode, nor is 
it going to magically make it work with our KConfigXT framework or help 
to automatically migrate our users current, existing KConfig settings.

UniConf is also cool, if slightly crack-induced and scary. But the tech 
is cool and the demos that Avery posted are pretty exciting from a pure 
"Holy crap, you can actually do that?" standpoint.

But what you guys have suggested doing, and have been trying to take 
steps towards, is a damned good way to make FreeDesktop less useful for 
everyone involved and specifically, in this instance, to piss off those 
of us who work on KDE. You've completely ignored the fact that there are 
several of us who are subscribed on this list, and you've insulted us 
multiple times over, which I can only hope is because you didn't realize 
that this is not Yet Another GNOME List.

--
Chris Lee
KDE developer