Le Lun 3 avril 2006 10:45, Shane Stixrud a écrit : > On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > >> GConf started much the same way as elektra. I didn't notice it making >> user >> or admin life easier. >> >> I could be wrong of course. This had been known to happen. > > > Many features that you apparently take for granted in gnome are ONLY > DOABLE due to gconf's unified configuration system. I fear you overstate the technical part (gconf) and understate the social part (an umbrella project getting its members to agree on key namings, values and location) > Similar features > and functionality for administrators and programmers is non-existent / > impractical to create for the remainder of the Linux operation system as > it lacks this same functionality. Do you have a technical argument to > make on this subject? If not I will kindly refrain from continuing in > this discussion with you. Java, SOAP, etc. Projects that have focused on the technical plumbing like you, and already have an homogenous technical specification. Now try to make two java or SOAP apps to talk and you'd better get ready for a boatload of work getting them agree on common semantics (what the REST people have pointed out) Even if you manage to elektrify Gnome and KDE do you think you'll have more luck getting them agree on common keys than getting them agree on common filesystem objects *now* ? (oh, right semantics is not your problem, you don't even do typing/schemas but I'm sorry 90% of unix conf woes are semantics only). Every conf bit is an elektra key. Fine goal. Everything in Unix is a file. Now does it get you much closer to app interoperability? -- Nicolas Mailhot -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
