Status of gconf -> dconf

[Callum Lerwick]

On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 02:53 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Shawn Starr wrote:
> > This may be more of a GNOME question but are there folks @ Red Hat working
> > on dconf? It would do Fedora (and future RHELs) well if we helped replace
> > gconf. Installing GNOME related RPMs or yum updates is horrible due to the
> > time the XML schemas take to register.
> 
> As long as:
> > dconf and GSettings are not yet free software. They are currently "all
> > rights reserved".
> this is not going to happen.

Not to mention: 

 "API/ABI stability is not even close to being reached.

 You probably don't want to use this yet."

( http://live.gnome.org/dconf )

> I hate projects doing that. Why don't they make this Free Software right
> from the start (as opposed to "in the future")?

This is a clear sign that they simply Don't Get It.

A binary format? Someone Really Doesn't Get It.

What is this, Windows? Everything is a file. Hey, I have a wild idea!
Store your config in ~/.fooconfig/keyname, the contents being the value
of the key. Wow, now you have hashed key lookups, locking (fcntl),
change notification (inotify), permissions and ACLs...

This is from 2005:

http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2005/04/stupidity-of-dconf.html

Has anything changed?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090223/8af685f7/attachment.sig>