An analysis about a generic desktop application configuration management system

Waldo Bastian bastian at
Tue Apr 12 13:40:59 EEST 2005

On Tuesday 12 April 2005 00:44, Maks Orlovich wrote:
> Let me add a few of my views, to those of Rich I largely agree with:
> > >       * Desktop applications from all environments can work together
> > >         with a few common configuration-settings. There will be no more
> > >         need to duplicate these settings
> >
> > For me, this is a non-issue (I only care about KDE).
> It would also be necessary to show that the list is non-empty, and that any
> examples are meaningful, and not better addressed by less-invasive
> solutions (say XSettings)

XSettings doesn't touch on storage, it would solve the problem of applications 
sharing common settings, it wouldn't solve the problem of managing those 
settings. I would limit the use of XSettings to visual appearance.

> > >       * There's a need for a default backend database format that can
> > >         store Unicode data in a tree-like structure or in a structure
> > >         that emulates a tree.
> You can emulate a tree in anything that's not bounded. So the requirement
> doesn't mean anything.

Some formats map easier than others, the current KCofnig .ini format doesn't 
map nicely although I have some ideas for improving that. Compatibility 
requirements make it non-trivial though.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the xdg mailing list