Re: Again on KControl

On Friday 05 March 2004 01:40, Simon Edwards wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 10:35 pm, Frans Englich wrote:
> > Why KAdmin & the Usability aspect
> > ---------------------------------
> > KControl is not designed for housing administration functionality - it is
> > designed for displaying small units of _configuration_ options.
> > Administration functionality, such as managing big numbers of users,
> > setting up router tables, mail servers etc. _requires_ widgets and
> > functionality KControl doesn't have, nor can be extended to have. For
> > example toolbars and menus.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > What do the kde-debian think in this matter? Would an KAdmin duplicate
> > their work? Is it an good idea? (CCing)
>
> I'm working on admin tools in the kde-debian project.
> ( http://www.simonzone.com/software/guidance/ ) They operate as KC modules.
>
> My philosophy reguarding KC is that it is for configuring the OS and the
> operating environment (i.e. the desktop environment). Basically the
> layer(s) of software that sits below the application level. As someone else
> said once, "in KC you can configure things that don't have a Settings
> menu". Which I think is a good guideline.
>
> As for admin stuff and KAdmin, spawning another kcontrol like program
> doesn't make much sense in a desktop environment where the person using the
> computer is often the admin person too. Better to keep all config stuff in
> the same place.

Ok, perhaps I should clarify; All functionality regular users need should be 
in KControl. When I talk about "administration" I refer to what system 
administrators do so KAdmin would only be installed and used by admin folks.

>
> Big things that need menus and toolbars etc like administrating mail
> servers and web servers don't really belong in KC. They are applications.
> You would install a machine for the purpose of being a web server, but you
> wouldn't install a machine just so that you can configure it's icon scheme.
> It is a different class of functionality to that in KC. For those kinds of
> "primary" functions you are probably better off just making a normal
> full-blown KDE application to configure it.

Yes, hence KParts. I thought it could be a good idea unify them under a common 
umbrella app for the reasons in my previous letter. What is best, individual 
apps or KParts in "KAdmin"? (and why?)


		Frans