Re: GnuCash page on GO site

On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 05:59, Derek Atkins wrote:
> [email protected] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
> > I'm not sure what you refer to when you say "data types".  
> > If you mean using things like gconf, then yes, we should do that.
> > Our current way of dealing with user defaults & etc. is homebrew
> > and I see nothing wrong with moving to things like gconf type 
> > infraastructure. (right derek?)
> 
> Yes and no.  As you say, we have something that mostly works, so I'd
> be hesitant to spend any precious resources on moving to something
> else.  OTOH I would have no objection to moving option storage from
> our ad-hack[sic] mechanism to gconf, but keep in mind that some
> options are stored in the data file, too (because they are data
> preferences, not user options).  So the UI needs the flexibility to
> store options in either place.

Agreed.  My preference is to use common infrastructure wherever we can. 
As part of the gnome2 port I've put some things that into gconf that are
data independent, like which columns are visible in a dialog or the
column to sort on.  I'd also like to eventually store data dependent
information for these dialogs, like which accounts are expanded and
which are closed, but this has to go into the data file so we can't use
gconf for it.

David

_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.gnucash.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBAPjo4lSwHWMdNRQQRAmDyAKCoF2MlyBtNjXpHhdrV/+GcGlkFPwCgtrOX
GN6mjvrjYFH3fSwX+2065ng=
=k2mR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----