Re: Merging gio into glib

[jamie <jamiemcc blueyonder co uk>]

On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 11:06 -0500, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 17:45 +0200, Xan wrote:
> > On Nov 7, 2007 5:35 PM, Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com> wrote:
> > > The idea is that this library would contain non-ui stuff that
> > > applications want but that requires GObject, so they can't be in glib.
> > > Various names for this library has been thrown about:
> > >  gfoundation, gbase, gplatform
> > 
> > Would it be again one module and multiple so or only one so? If it's
> > the former, how does it improve things? If the latter, what about
> > people interested in gio but not in gsettings (for example)?
> > 
> > (Maybe I'm missing something, but the benefits are not really clear to me)
> 
> One library, one .so file, one pkg-config file.
> 
> "glib" as the package (ie: what's in the tar file) would then contain 5
> libraries: glib, gobject, gmodule, gthread and gfoundation (or
> whatever).  Each of these would have their own .so and their own
> pkg-config.
> 

Hi Ryan,

what about overriding GSettings with a different backend (LDAP, Tracker
etc)? 

Will GSsettings use pluggable modules like GIO or will the library need
replacing for another backend?

If the latter, then GSettings would need to sit in its own library
surely?

Also I prefer the name gplatform as its really intended for platform
stuff

jamie