Mikael Hallendal micke at imendio.com
Fri Mar 4 19:03:17 EET 2005

Philip Van Hoof wrote:

If the only thing you intend to do is to rename the namespace for the 
sake of removing the 'g' it sounds like a really stupid thing to do 
since it will break all existing users of GConf, including all GNOME 
applications just for the sake of pleasing some non-hacker kid.

Since KDE will wrap this in some C++ layer anyway they can easily "hide" 
the 'g' in the API in their wrapping layer if that's an issue. And 
seriously, renaming things to get rid of a G just is silly.

If that is what stands in the way of KDE using it I don't think they 
really want to use it anyway. I mean, for the people that will make 
decisions in KDE I doubt it matters since they will look at the 
technical part of it.

So, instead of proposing decorational changes I would suggest you 
started lobbying to see:

1) If KDE is even interested in changing their configuration framework,
    and if so,

2) If they are interested in changing to GConf, or

3) Work on a proposal that would be accepted by both KDE and GNOME.

   Mikael Hallendal

Imendio AB, http://www.imendio.com/

More information about the xdg mailing list