Re: directory names for configuration files
On Tuesday 18 January 2005 15:43, Derek Broughton wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 January 2005 10:14, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 18. Januar 2005 14:46 schrieb Derek Broughton:
> > > On Tuesday 18 January 2005 08:06, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> > > > I just looked at the chosen names and do not understand the reason
> > > > for it: - Why is it /etc/kde3 but ~/.kde?
> >
> > I meant whey they have different names in /etc and home (hidden files are
> > normal and good). Keeping the /etc/kde2 around results in never removing
> > them, even on a purge? I do not quite understand why there not a
> > simple /etc/kde. Keeping backup of the old files is part of the
> > administrator job, not the package maintainers duty.
>
> It's a fair argument, but I've listened to too many administrators complain
> that there was no way to back out of a change. When it's as big a change
> as kde3, it makes sense. I don't remember now how I got rid of the kde2
> files - I think I manually removed them at some point.
>
> > > > - Why are the .DCOP* files not in ~/.kde? Does anything else use
> > > > dcop?
> > >
> > > Anything else _can_. I don't know what else does.
> >
> > As long as it's not standardized at freedesktop.org, nothing else than
> > KDE will use it.
>
> First you have to demonstrate how useful it is, then you have to convince
> the other people it's a worthwhile standard, _then_ they start to use it.
I think the usefullness is out of question, there wouldn't be D-BUS if DCOP
didn't show how powerful it is.
The problem is the perceived dependency on Qt
Those who created non-Qt implementations of DCOP couldn't get the other
developers attention soon enough, now it is too late as D-BUS is more likely
to get broader acception.
Cheers,
Kevin
Reply to: