On Thu, 22 Jul 2004, Ted Gould wrote:
On Wed, 2004-07-21 at 19:59, MenTaLguY wrote:
By the way, while I think it's a good idea to have extension preferences in separate XML files from the main preferences, I would like to preserve a single namespace for preferences as viewed from the actual preferences API.
That might involve something like "mounting" a file into the namespace (but that should be handled automatically as part of extension registration/unregistration).
I don't like this, and I think the biggest reason is that I'd like to see us eventually move use something like GConf for configuration in the future. And, putting things in different files pretty much excludes us from doing that.
Currently, the extension preferences are put in their own group in the preferences file, and they don't touch any of the other stuff. They are identified by their ID (which should be unique) and so they aren't going to harm anything else.
I like the idea of them being more modular, but I like the idea of using GConf better (yes, I do realize that GConf won't work on all platforms).
Anyone know anything about UniConf? http://open.nit.ca/wiki/?page=UniConf
It seems like it would provide both Gconf and Windows Registry but I dont know how good it is.
- Alan H.