configuration system notes

Buola Buola buola69 at
Thu Apr 7 18:25:28 EEST 2005

On Apr 7, 2005 5:13 PM, CHonton at <CHonton at> wrote:
> Havoc Pennington <hp at> wrote on 04/07/2005 10:18:23 AM:
>  > Previously I have posted:
>  >
>  > which are some changes to make to gconf, with three of those changes
>  > prioritized as more important vs. the others.
>  > 
> In these plans the client library is both a thin convenience layer over the
> D-BUS interface and responsible for loading/enforcing the schemas.  If I
> have this right, there are two client layers: raw configuration DBUS
> service, and validated configuration from a schema library.  Should these
> two layers be considered in separate specs? 
>  My interest in a configuration system is to provide desktop integration for
> Java applications.  The desires are: 
> - Minimal amount of shared libraries in the client process. 
> - Single api for all ui desktops. 
I think the loading/enforcing schemas should take place in the daemon,
not in the client, so that applications can directly use the DBus API
how they prefer. the DBus client libraries have different
implementations for glib, Qt, python, whatever, so having more things
in the client would make things really complicated. The client
shouldn't need to link to any library besides libdbus

> chas 
> _______________________________________________
> xdg mailing list
> xdg at

More information about the xdg mailing list