Re: [Planner Dev] Patch to add an abstraction layer between Planner and GConf

[Jani tiainen <redetin luukku com>]

Mikael Hallendal wrote:

> On tis, 2004-08-10 at 07:19 +0300, Jani tiainen wrote:
>
> > Jon Wilkins wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2004-08-09 at 13:46, Richard Hult wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 2. implement planner-conf-win32.c in terms of registry (or other
> > > > method?)
> > >
> > > Could there be a build (or run-time) option to read a simple ini instead
> > > of registry - this could be really useful... messing with registry
> > > entries can be a real PITA compared to good-ol' ini's!
> >
> > Actually, registry is more analoguous to GConf than INI's. INI's are 
> > deprecated method in win32 environment.
>
>
> I don't think it would make a huge different (other from the one
> implementing the backend). We don't need anything more than .ini files
> since we'll shortcut the notifications in the backend. Ie. when you
> update a key in planner a notification, if needed, should be emitted
> from the win32 backend. 

Well, since I'm now writing real backend for win32 registry, only thing 
I really didn't understood what for is function "planner_conf_dir_exists".

--

Jani Tiainen