Re: dbus and GNOME 2.8

[Rob Adams <readams readams net>]

So should gconf be deprecated in favor of Storage?  Or perhaps
reimplemented using a Storage backend?  (Long term, obviously)

It would certainly be cool to be able to do things like type into a box
"launch the application I set to have a blue background yesterday
afternoon".

-Rob

On Mon, 2004-04-05 at 19:01 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-04-05 at 11:58, Paolo Maggi wrote:
> > "Do not store anything but preferences in GConf. Documents, session
> > state, random data blobs do not belong in GConf. Stuff breaks if you do
> > this. Moreover, THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT IT'S EVEN POSSIBLE TO WRITE
> > TO THE GCONF DATABASE. Which means you may not use GConf as an IPC
> > mechanism or when it's required to be able to store a piece of data."
> > 
> 
> If talking about the future, maybe this could change, e.g.:
> http://log.ometer.com/2004-03.html#1
> 
> Re: the rest of the thread, just using a database directly doesn't seem
> right at all to me; you want a database via some kind of
> structured/simplified abstraction such as Storage probably. But given
> that you could use it to store all the desktop's data of all kinds.
> 
> As Seth explained it to me today Storage essentially is XML-type data
> (tree of nodes with attributes) in queryable database form with change
> notification. So this seems ideal for address books and all sorts of
> other stuff. Unlike gconf, it would be be scalable even with lots of
> data and documents and whatever in there.
> 
> But this needs to be well-baked and thought-through before we put it in
> the desktop.
> 
> Havoc
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
>