Re: libsettings

WANG Gang RD-ILAB-PEK schrieb:
> Hi,
Hi!

> Since there are lots of setting mechanisms lying around
and being used, people always have to make their choices
when they need a setting system. Just like IAC (Inter
Application Communication), libsettings tries to bring a
simple and easy to use interface to application programmers.


Right, and abstracting the different settings, as far as I
understood.
Since we right now have to deal with xsettings, GConf and
other settings
at the same time.

> We have had a similiar situation when dealing with IPC
in our GPE Phone Edition and in earlier discussions in LiPS.
Dbus finally overcome other candidates to be chosen as the
basic IPC system in our G(PE)^2, but there still existed a
craving for a simpler interface, hence IAC came into being.

Right.

> Or one step back, if we choose not to bring more chaos,
ie, we stop developping and using libsettings but use one of
the existing setting systems, GConf will be my personnal
favorite since it is already part of GNOME and a lot of
applications are using it. Backends support is also another
plus to GConf (although xml is the only one for the time
being, we can foresee other backends to be added in the
future). APIs are also full-featured. And the schemas it
uses is perfect for download-and-install which makes GConf a
good choice for DM also.

It is not too late yet to choose *one* settings mechanism as
a standard
for the rest of the project. I would just strongly recommend
to adapt
all other components to that mechanism as well, i.e. trying
to get rid
of xsettings and the others as much as possible.

In the long run this could make us even independant of X11
which is IMHO
a desirable goal. Not for now but later we might want to
have a way
scaled down version which runs on DirectFB or GTK-FB. This
is currently
near to impossible because of the heavy use of xsettings.

For the next step I would propose that someone - hehe ;) -
takes a look
at *all* components in G(PE)2 and identifies
a) which settings mechanisms are already in place
b) what they are used for
c) if and how they can be replaced by e.g. GConf.

Any volunteers?

> BR
> Gang
Cheers
  nils faerber

-- 
kernel concepts GbR        Tel: +49-271-771091-12
Sieghuetter Hauptweg 48    Fax: +49-271-771091-19
D-57072 Siegen             Mob: +49-176-21024535
--

_______________________________________________
Gpephone-devel mailing list
Gpephone-devellinuxtogo.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/lis
tinfo/gpephone-devel

Hi,

> 
> In the long run this could make us even independant of
X11 
> which is IMHO
> a desirable goal. Not for now but later we might want
to have a way
> scaled down version which runs on DirectFB or GTK-FB.
This is 
> currently
> near to impossible because of the heavy use of
xsettings.
> 
> For the next step I would propose that someone - hehe
;) - 
> takes a look
> at *all* components in G(PE)2 and identifies
> a) which settings mechanisms are already in place
> b) what they are used for
> c) if and how they can be replaced by e.g. GConf.

I just removed the dependence on libxsettings from
gpe-phonepanel,
libsettings is used instead (for this moment libsettings
relies on
GConf).

> 
> Any volunteers?

I think I will.

> 
> > BR
> > Gang
> Cheers
>   nils faerber
> 
> -- 
> kernel concepts GbR        Tel: +49-271-771091-12
> Sieghuetter Hauptweg 48    Fax: +49-271-771091-19
> D-57072 Siegen             Mob: +49-176-21024535
> --
> 

_______________________________________________
Gpephone-devel mailing list
Gpephone-devellinuxtogo.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/lis
tinfo/gpephone-devel