[linux-elitists] Re: Yet another mozilla atrocity
Sun Oct 5 08:43:16 PDT 2003
Jeff Waugh <email@example.com> writes:
> <quote who="Karsten M. Self">
>> For the most part, where I like GNOME apps it's *despite* rather
>> than on account of many of the GNOME tight-integration features.
Definitely. What's more, I have yet to use a gnome app where I didn't
eventually decided wasn't worth the headache.
> May as well use it, particularly if you
> want a consistent interface (both from a developer POV and an
> administrator's POV). Little text files in users home directories
> are not group/host/all enforceable, etc.
These are such hard problems that you needed gconf -- as opposed to,
say, a set of conf-file-reading libraries? If this is all you're
trying to do gconfd seems like incredible overkill.
I can easily see the point of a lib that provides a standard syntax
for config files, is capable of setting policy (e.g., read global
config first, and allow it to override the per-user config), and takes
care of locking in a consistent, predictable way. None of this is
> Why would you have so many options and preferences that you have no
> choice but to provide search facilities for them? (Yes, we're
> talking about a different world to vim, mutt and friends.) The KDE
> control center provides this, mostly because it is stuffed to the
> gills with pointless, masturbatory preferences.
Yes, of course. Anything graphical needs to be dumbed down. Keep
those (l)users in their place. As far as I can tell, this is the core
of your position, yet it's completely without support. There's a
problem with the configuration interface? Well, you shouldn't really
be using that anyway. Configuration is only for the mentally ill.
Nice combination of non-sequitur & ad hominem.
Jeremy Hankins <firstname.lastname@example.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
More information about the linux-elitists