From kde-core-devel  Thu Mar 01 17:36:56 2007
From: Michael Pyne <mpyne () purinchu ! net>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 17:36:56 +0000
To: kde-core-devel
Subject: Re: KConfig vs. QSettings (was Re: Porting problems with
Message-Id: <200703011236.59658.mpyne () purinchu ! net>
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=117277101015270
MIME-Version: 1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--nextPart1655777.0ohPq329hy"

--nextPart1655777.0ohPq329hy
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On Thursday 01 March 2007 12:12, Paolo Capriotti wrote:
> Ok, fine. I'll work on KConfig, even if I don't like its approach very
> much (especially the use of QVariants).
> It's just that I'm a bit disappointed for all the effort I've put into
> this Settings thing that has not been considered at all.

If you put that much work into Settings for your own software then it's not=
=20
wasted effort.

If you put that much work into Settings just in the hopes that it would=20
replace KConfig then you probably should have mailed -core-devel first so w=
e=20
could have steered you off that course.

But, you live and learn. ;)

Regards,
 - Michael Pyne

--nextPart1655777.0ohPq329hy
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBF5w87qjQYp5Omm0oRAl72AJ9RsJ1z3An/uHhfrRPRaDRozx9YOACdH7Ob
rVQxM2UPcAHQMahc48yTCwA=
=bTnF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1655777.0ohPq329hy--