On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 12:11 -0400, Jamie McCracken wrote:
>> I would rephrase this as "valac as a build dependency for gnome"
>>
>> as valac is like yacc/bison/flex in that there is no runtime dependency
>> and only people developing or comp
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 18:24 +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 19:17 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > e-d-s stores the data in GConf, so it needs to be migrated indeed. Also,
> > even though the desktop-wide settings might be obsoleted
> > (/desktop/GNOME, for instance), apps still nee
Hi all,
Nautilus-Actions has just been branched for Gnome 2.28.
Development for stable release may continue on gnome-2-28 branch.
Development for next release will continue on master.
Regards
Pierre
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list
> "Alberto" == Alberto Ruiz writes:
Alberto> Is there a need to convert user settings? I mean, we're talking
Alberto> about GNOME 3.0 here, most sensible data is stored via
Alberto> evolution-data-server, tracker, or other custom storage so the
Alberto> only difference would be appearance. I
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 19:17 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> e-d-s stores the data in GConf, so it needs to be migrated indeed. Also,
> even though the desktop-wide settings might be obsoleted
> (/desktop/GNOME, for instance), apps still need their /apps/$app
> configuration tree to be migrated, since
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 17:39 +0100, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> 2009/10/14 Xavier Claessens :
> > Le lundi 12 octobre 2009 à 11:27 -0400, Ryan Lortie a écrit :
> >> I'd like to propose the inclusion of dconf for GNOME 2.30 in the desktop
> >> release set.
> >
> > This is great news! I'm all in favor of dc
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 12:59 -0400, Jamie McCracken wrote:
> The important thing is the ability of an admin to easily copy a branch
> of config settings. Thats trivial in gconf and I use it for copying
> settings between machines (cp ~/.gconf/blah)
I disagree that it's trivial with cp. It's only po
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
>
> Large deployments shouldn't mess with the local users' configuration.
> Probably specialized backends for GSettings like an APOC or plain LDAP
> one would be a much better approach to manage large deployments.
Maybe; I am personally really
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 17:51 +0100, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> 2009/10/14 Shaun McCance :
> > On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 15:54 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> >> Take 20,000 distro Gnome users, what percentage of them do you think have
> >> ever hand edited their configuration, what percentage do you think have
> >>
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 11:48 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 17:25 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 10:54 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 15:54 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > > Take 20,000 distro Gnome users, what percentage of them do
2009/10/14 Shaun McCance :
> On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 15:54 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>> Take 20,000 distro Gnome users, what percentage of them do you think have
>> ever hand edited their configuration, what percentage do you think have
>> ever used things like gconftool. For that matter what percentage
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 17:25 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 10:54 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 15:54 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Take 20,000 distro Gnome users, what percentage of them do you think have
> > > ever hand edited their configuration, what
2009/10/12 Sriram Ramkrishna :
> You tell em, Vincent. I've been wanting to tell him No for years now.
> That said, Ryan, are you proposing this as a replacement for GConf? That
> wasn't particularly clear in your initial mail.
dconf is being proposed as a replacement for the gconf configuration
2009/10/14 Martin Meyer :
> It sounds like the backend for GSettings is somewhat pluggagle, at
> least on a per-platform basis. Can we make this configurable by the
> distro people at compile-time or runtime?
Exactly, in fact, there is already a windows registry backend
developed by a GSoC
> Here
2009/10/14 Alex Launi :
> How far away are mono/python bindings? Can I use raw dbus is there are not
> client helper libraries?
There is no work on that regard so far. GSettings will eventually be
proposed for inclusion in GLib so any glib/gobject binding should
include that API.
>
> --
> -- Alex
2009/10/14 Xavier Claessens :
> Le lundi 12 octobre 2009 à 11:27 -0400, Ryan Lortie a écrit :
>> I'd like to propose the inclusion of dconf for GNOME 2.30 in the desktop
>> release set.
>
> This is great news! I'm all in favor of dconf. Do you have plans to move
> to GNOME plateforme? IMO that real
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 10:54 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 15:54 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Take 20,000 distro Gnome users, what percentage of them do you think have
> > ever hand edited their configuration, what percentage do you think have
> > ever used things like gconftool.
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 15:54 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Take 20,000 distro Gnome users, what percentage of them do you think have
> ever hand edited their configuration, what percentage do you think have
> ever used things like gconftool. For that matter what percentage of
> normal users do you think
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 15:54 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
Sorry if I not made it clear - I'm against putting everything in binary
which does not mean that binary format is ultimately evil. Probably XML
is not the easiest format to parse.
I am still a bit 'scared' by idea of binary format unless it is ne
> - FS are usually implemented very carefully. They tend to be part of
> kernel. On the other hand desktop applications are designed much more
> 'speedy'. Sometimes application hangs (much more frequent then kernel
> locks IMHO), sometimes it crashes.
Desktop application software mostly sucks. I w
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 11:46 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> everyone asking for a plain text format (or even an XML format) for
> *storage* should be forced to get only that on their machines, but
> should also be barred from complaining why their boot process takes a
> minute instead of 10 seconds
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 09:26:56AM -0400, Martin Meyer wrote:
> It sounds like the backend for GSettings is somewhat pluggagle, at
> least on a per-platform basis. Can we make this configurable by the
> distro people at compile-time or runtime?
>
> Here's my thinking:
Let me add my thinking. The
2009/10/13 Javier Jardón :
> I've already created a page to track the progress and as a central
> place to get info and examples about the migration to dconf/gsettings
Is there a migration guide somewhere? I suspect a lot of heavy grunt
of the conversion could be written using a spatch script.
Ri
It sounds like the backend for GSettings is somewhat pluggagle, at
least on a per-platform basis. Can we make this configurable by the
distro people at compile-time or runtime?
Here's my thinking:
1) People may not like whatever storage mechanism is offered by dconf,
so options may be good.
2) S
Dne 14.10.2009 12:46, Emmanuele Bassi napsal(a):
> everyone asking for a plain text format (or even an XML format) for
> *storage* should be forced to get only that on their machines, but
> should also be barred from complaining why their boot process takes a
> minute instead of 10 seconds. and no:
Dne 14.10.2009 14:48, Dan Winship napsal(a):
> Sorry, I thought the silliness made it clear that I was not actually
> making that complaint,
Of course I knew that, that was just blatant hijacking of your post for
my nefarious purposes.
Matěj
--
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/, Jabber: mceplceplovi
On 10/14/2009 05:24 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 13.10.2009 22:42, Dan Winship napsal(a):
>> OMG ITS TEH WINDOWS REGISTRY!!!1!1II|! IF ANY APP WRITES A SINGLE BYTE
>> WRONG THEN ALL OF YOUR APPS WILL BREAK AND YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO LOG IN
>> ANY MORE
>
> +1 :)
>
> People who are not able to learn
> everyone asking for a plain text format (or even an XML format) for
> *storage* should be forced to get only that on their machines, but
> should also be barred from complaining why their boot process takes a
> minute instead of 10 seconds. and no: having plain text storage and
> adding a binary
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 23:06 +0200, Luca Ferretti wrote:
> 2009/10/13 Rodrigo Moya :
> >> Ryan is a bit sad to not get feedback on his proposal, so a bit more
> >> seriously: I think what we probably need is a migration plan. Should we
> >> move all the code from gconf to dconf in one cycle (if poss
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:32 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna
wrote:
> That said, Ryan, are you proposing this as a replacement for GConf? That
> wasn't particularly clear in your initial mail.
>
As I understand it, the replacement for GConf would be two-fold:
GSettings in glib (the interface, to be merge
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 11:46 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 11:24 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> > Dne 13.10.2009 22:42, Dan Winship napsal(a):
> > > OMG ITS TEH WINDOWS REGISTRY!!!1!1II|! IF ANY APP WRITES A SINGLE BYTE
> > > WRONG THEN ALL OF YOUR APPS WILL BREAK AND YOU WON'T B
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 11:24 +0200, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> Dne 13.10.2009 22:42, Dan Winship napsal(a):
> > OMG ITS TEH WINDOWS REGISTRY!!!1!1II|! IF ANY APP WRITES A SINGLE BYTE
> > WRONG THEN ALL OF YOUR APPS WILL BREAK AND YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO LOG IN
> > ANY MORE
>
> +1 :)
>
> People who are not
Dne 14.10.2009 11:35, Vivien Malerba napsal(a):
> How about using an SQLite database for dconf as a local store. Sure it
> won't be as fast as a mapped file but SQLite is pretty fast if indexes
> are correctly constructed, and it's hard to corrupt.
No the focus of my hatred are binary configuratio
2009/10/14 Matěj Cepl :
> Dne 13.10.2009 22:42, Dan Winship napsal(a):
>> OMG ITS TEH WINDOWS REGISTRY!!!1!1II|! IF ANY APP WRITES A SINGLE BYTE
>> WRONG THEN ALL OF YOUR APPS WILL BREAK AND YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO LOG IN
>> ANY MORE
>
> +1 :)
>
> People who are not able to learn from history are doom
Dne 13.10.2009 22:42, Dan Winship napsal(a):
> OMG ITS TEH WINDOWS REGISTRY!!!1!1II|! IF ANY APP WRITES A SINGLE BYTE
> WRONG THEN ALL OF YOUR APPS WILL BREAK AND YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO LOG IN
> ANY MORE
+1 :)
People who are not able to learn from history are doomed to live through
it again.
http
Le lundi 12 octobre 2009 à 11:27 -0400, Ryan Lortie a écrit :
> I'd like to propose the inclusion of dconf for GNOME 2.30 in the desktop
> release set.
This is great news! I'm all in favor of dconf. Do you have plans to move
to GNOME plateforme? IMO that really should replace gconf for GNOME3,
thi
Le mardi 13 octobre 2009 à 23:06 +0200, Luca Ferretti a écrit :
> 2009/10/13 Rodrigo Moya :
> >> Ryan is a bit sad to not get feedback on his proposal, so a bit more
> >> seriously: I think what we probably need is a migration plan. Should we
> >> move all the code from gconf to dconf in one cycle
You tell em, Vincent. I've been wanting to tell him No for years now.
That said, Ryan, are you proposing this as a replacement for GConf? That
wasn't particularly clear in your initial mail.
sri
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Vincent Untz wrote:
> Le lundi 12 octobre 2009, à 11:27 -0400, Ry
38 matches
Mail list logo
