[RFC] KConfigBase v KConfig

[Dominik Haumann]

On Friday 04 November 2005 15:38, Thomas Braxton wrote:
> On Friday 04 November 2005 08:11 am, Dominik Haumann wrote:
> > On Friday 04 November 2005 14:47, Thomas Braxton wrote:
> > Maybe rename
> >  - KConfigBase -> KConfig
> >  - KConfig -> KFileConfig
> > as that's what it is supposed to be imo. Then KConfig could be used for
> > all arguments.
>
> KConfig should probably be renamed KConfigINI, the backend is called
> KConfigINIBackend.
>
> > Only problem is the *lot of* work to do it, also very confusing if a
> > class suddenly does something else. otoh: it's KDE4 and the right time
> > to fix such things ;)
>
> Actually it might be easier to do it this way, would have to change 4
> files kconfigbase.{cpp,h} and kconfig.{cpp,h}.
> Rename kconfig.{cpp,h} to kconfigini.{cpp,h} and rename KConfig to
> KConfigINI. Rename kconfigbase.{cpp,h} to kconfig.{cpp,h} and rename
> KConfigBase to KConfig.
> Then the hard part change all uses of KConfigBase to KConfig. It seems it
> would be easier this way, according to lxr.kde.org 3500 KConfigBase vs
> 27000+ KConfig .

If you really want to
 (1) KConfigBase -> KConfig and
 (2) KConfig -> KIniConfig (please take Ini instead of INI, equivalent to
     KURLRequester, should be KUrlRequester)
then you should wait at least a week after you did (2), and then do (1).
Otherwise it's a mess :)

There was very few feedback so far, so maybe wait for other opinions.

-- 
Dominik