Re: Xfconf's new gsettings backend
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On Mon, 2018-10-22 at 23:18 -0400, Unit 193 wrote:
> In case you haven't read, Xfconf 4.13.6 brings a new gsettings backend[0]. As
> it stands in git right now, the new backend is placed in the 'xfconf' package
> which then is marked as providing 'gsettings-backend'. This somewhat diverges
> with what the other current backends do, which is provide a new
> *-gsettings-backend package.
>
> If we wanted to follow suit of gconf/dconf, we could do so by applying the
> patch that is attached. The advantage of doing so is that one can continue to
> use xfconf while not using the xfconf gsettings backend as there's no migration
> step, while allowing those that wish to get rid of dconf and not have two
> settings systems can. The downside of course is having to go through NEW.
Hi, thanks for the summary. Quick questions (some more directed to upstream
maybe):
- - it seems that the gsettings backend is not used by default, at least for
now; any idea if it'll be mandatory in the future?
- - when enabled, that means all gsettings can be stored through xfconf, using
whatever xfconf storage backend is (currently .xml files in
.config/xfce4/xfconf/xfce-perchannel-xml), is that right?
- - when starting to provide a gsettings backend, how will interactions with
other backend be handled? Can two backends run concurrently? Is there some
kind of migration from one backend to another?
In any case, those questions are really meaningful when we start enabling it
by default, which is not the case right now. If the only drawback to splitting
the backend to a different package is that it has to go through NEW, then no
issue for me.
Regards,
- --
Yves-Alexis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEE8vi34Qgfo83x35gF3rYcyPpXRFsFAlvO3UUACgkQ3rYcyPpX
RFsB5QgAjekV3Bme/0GsvjUY3mHnmpTqlS+WGT0tn9o+WODZUnN1jj8afBLQk1JR
hZbsXdAwcntiyXokbEGBZcJdzTHhwC+qSNndr+UKSHRCAWYzw4RXoTgEmbfC6Fz0
44uO1dw0TYiX/SvqeaHnbJGFfuS4BX8mBvHYxWIEjLqpwcF1zuGIqka8EgTdpQpZ
8/gCj9dInVdRYipY2Lcg9Fk+Qp3YrCFD4rpnpabR4cah4qmnZlf/hdPQlDZ5odCI
qX1YWYWANG9CN+sq0IkAzwHBSWhTmWnYfTx82WgSV1CWhSUh95au8lSZwaN9tr0O
D3B4joGucm9M0I3uaGErmfjF/Xuu7A==
=EaMz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: