Re: Old gconf keys (was: Tab width)
Adam Hooper <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.galeon.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, 2005-24-03 at 16:09 +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > if gconf way of doing things is so bad, why > did no one write a backend using .ini files ? Such a backend would be > vastly superior to the existing one from what I understand, so it should > be easy to prove it to the world and make distro use it as the default > backend, wouldn't it ? You're completely correct: if .ini files were a superior way to implement GConf, then making a .ini file backend would be no problem. The simple truth is, there isn't a problem here. A .ini backend would not be a lot of work, wouldn't require much technical expertise, and wouldn't take much time. But nobody who has the ability to "solve" the XML back-end "problem" has done so. Draw your own conclusions. -- Adam Hooper <[email protected]>
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 189 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCQ7wG90GtBxQ61zARArloAKCZhwAve/0ba8BdTQSKWAZNNS3grgCgh4Bu 84AgKw7bocFWjSrG24u9USM= =q8o5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----