RFC: KConfig XT (KDE 3.2)
dstone at trinity.unimelb.edu.au
Mon Mar 17 04:38:41 GMT 2003
On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 08:36:32AM -0800, Neil Stevens scrawled:
> On Sunday March 16, 2003 12:36, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 04:38:48PM +0100, Waldo Bastian scrawled:
> > > Goals
> > > =====
> > >
> > > * Have the default value for config entries defined in 1 place.
> > > Currently it is not uncommon to have them defined in three places:
> > > 1) In the application that reads the setting in order to use it
> > > 2) In the settings dialog when reading the setting
> > > 3) In the settings dialog when selecting "Use defaults".
> > >
> > > * Provide type-information about config entries to facilate
> > > "KConfEdit" like tools. Ideally type-information also includes
> > > range-information.
> > Bob the Angry flower says: "WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WHERE DID YOU LEARN
> > THAT WRONG!!".
> > Dudes, having a registry is *bad*. You know, we already have KConfEdit -
> > KWrite, vim, KVim, whatever.
> > I like the "defaults in one place" thing. The registry idea I don't
> > like, and IMHO that entire path is wrong, bad, evil, fucked-up and bad.
> If by "registry" you mean "an app that reads many KDE text files and
> presents them for unified editing," we already have at least two
> registries in KDE: File Associations and K Menu Editor.
> I see no harm in a System Defaults Editor intended for and aimed only at
This is the exact point where I stopped reading. Go away, acquire a
clue, read my mails on this discussion, and come back later (or not at
all, at your option). I'm not even going to bother reiterating my views
You've utterly missed the point - mine, KConfig XT's, and this entire
Daniel Stone <dstone at trinity.unimelb.edu.au>
Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the kde-core-devel