D-Conf

[Zack Rusin]

On Saturday 05 March 2005 08:17, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> If we want to let the KDE-people start using GConf, we'll have to
> make them feel good about it. Very good since they'll be adopting
> alien technologies.

So you think we base technical decision on the type of letters in a 
word? Personally I don't like the letter "d". I like "z". So my 
suggestion is this: to make KDE babies stop crying rename GConf to 
"Zack's Supper-Dooper Configuration Framework that All Desktops Love 
and Cherish, in Good or Bad, till Death Do Us Part, So Help Them Some 
Greater Entity. Woohaa". I think it's a good name. Sure, namespacing 
might be a little painful but hey, you have to do that for KDE.


> 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.

I hope you realize that KDE people are on this list and it's getting 
increasingly irritating when people who have no connection to KDE talk 
about us in third person portraying us a bunch of kids afraid of the 
letter "g". Do you think we're all bunch of 8 year olds who can't read? 
- "KDE doesn't use GNOME technologies" 
- "'G' is the problem. Remove the 'G'; they'll never figure it out". 

> A name is just a freaking name. Are you willing to give up on the
> idea of a kick-ass cross desktop world for one character of the
> name??

Like I said, we're not going to accept it if it starts with D. D-BUS 
starts with D and that fills out quota for D named libraries in KDE. We 
have open positions for B though.

> Changes in the existing applications WILL be needed. Lots of. The KDE
> applications will need MASSIVE changes. Try selling a generic
> configuration system by telling them:
>
> - You guys will basically need to rewrite 25% of your applications
> - We won't need to do one single thing
> - Cool don't you think?

And your response to all those is "but hey! the name starts with d!!". 
Uuu, I'm so excited...

As to the real facts are:
- GConf is interesting. I looked at integrating it in KDE about 2 years 
ago. KConfigEditor already uses GConf,
- we will probably reach some technical decision with regards to KConfig 
in the coming months but it's way too early to say anything,
- KConfig supports multiple backend. Because of some shortcoming in the 
backend structure writing a backend for GConf would be probably a 
little painful right now, but for KDE4 we could easily do it correctly. 
It'd be rather trivial in fact.
- We are on this list and personally I'd really appreciate if you'd stop 
portraying us a bunch of kids, especially that as the history shows we 
never ever made a decision that wasn't purely based on technical merits 
only.
- We do not give a damn whether a name has d, g, h, z, u or any letter 
you can come up. And before someone asks, yes, that includes all 
encodings.

Zack

-- 
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.