On Wednesday 13 August 2003 03:08, David Findlay wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 04:58 pm, Michael Pyne proclaimed:
> > I'm not a KDE developer (yet, heheheh :) ), but I very highly doubt it.
> > First of all, unless I'm mistaken, there is already something similar to
> > GConf2, which is the KConfig module.  It doesn't support tree-based
> > structures, but that is rather easy to emulate anyways, either by
> > switching groups or using different value strings (e.g. Colors-bgColor,
> > Colors-fgColor, etc.).
>
> The problem though at the moment is it's still all stored in a whole bunch
> of textfiles in the $HOME/.kde directory. A registry style system would be
> heaps faster, and more robust. Maybe gconf2 isn't the solution, but
> something similiar would be. Thanks,

  What makes you think it would be so much faster?  Do you have benchmarks of 
this in "real world kde applications" that show that this is the case?  10ms 
saved in an app that takes 2 seconds to start up is rather insignificant in 
this case.

   There is a tool in kdenonbeta under active development that will hopefully 
be in 3.2.0 which lets you edit your configuration hierarchy much like 
regedit does, only much better.

   If you want the admin to set certain settings, they can be done in the 
system directory.  Those files are read first.  The user can of course 
override, but you can block that too.

   Configuration history and rollback is probably quite expensive, but I'm 
sure it can be added if desired.  There is a sort of rollback system in the 
C++ API but it only lasts as long as the KConfig object (and the entries not 
written to disk).

   Arbitrary config backends would definitely be a nice feature for KConfig 
though.

-- 
George Staikos
KDE Developer				http://www.kde.org/
Staikos Computing Services Inc.		http://www.staikos.net/

 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<