Preparing GConf for the next generation (D-Conf related)

Mikael Hallendal micke at
Tue Mar 8 13:02:02 EET 2005

Philip Van Hoof wrote:


I'm a bit confused here. Are you tearing GConf to pieces out of guesses 
on what you think needs to be done or do you have a list of requirements 
that you haven't posted (or I have missed)?

What I think would be the best piece of action that should be done long 
before starting to do any actual hacking on the library it self is to 
define what would be needed.

That is, what is lacking/need to be removed from GConf in order for it 
to be a viable solution for KDE, OpenOffice etc. And while doing that 
also get a clear view on what is currently lacking for GNOME.

After that merge these thoughts into a list of things that would make a 
different if we change and talk this through with the GConf maintainers 
to get an idea from them if it's a good idea from GConf's point-of-view...

Best Regards,
   Mikael Hallendal

> I'm guessing I don't need to cross-post this? I'll just put the link to
> the gconf-list archived E-mail here.
> So FYI:

Imendio AB,

More information about the xdg mailing list