D-Conf

[Philip Van Hoof]

On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 17:12 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 16:50 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
 
> > But I can already hear the kids whining: "D-Conf depends on glib so it
> > sucks". Not that, when they do, they technically understand what they
> > say.

> So, if "kids" whine about using a dependency, we don't use that. What if
> non-kids whine about not reusing code, instead duplicating it
> (introducing bugs and more code to write/maintain). Do we ignore those
> people, favouring the kids whining? Doesn't sound like a good decision
> to me.

I'm 100% pro not removing GLib. Removing ORBit-2 is, however, something
that will need to be done. But as Mikael Hallendal said, this actually
"is" already done. So thats great.

What about renaming it to a more neutral name? How do the current GConf
maintainers feel about that proposal? "D-Conf" is just a proposal of
course :-).

And once the name is more neutral (that includes renaming the API
namespaces), it's only marketing the concept of a Cross Desktop
Configuration System to the GNOME and KDE developers that remains on the
TODO-list.


-- 
Philip Van Hoof, Software Developer @ Cronos
home: me at freax dot org
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org
work: philip dot vanhoof at cronos dot be
junk: philip dot vanhoof at gmail dot com
http://www.freax.be, http://www.freax.eu.org