Am Donnerstag, 29. März 2007 17:54 schrieb Bellegarde Cedric: > Le jeudi 29 mars 2007, Dennis Kasprzyk a écrit : > > Currently there are two types of configuration tools. Some with fixed > > functionality and some autogenerated. To improve the quality of the > > autogenerated tools I would like to make this proposal about additional > > values in the CompOption struct and the plugin vtable. > > I really disagree with this... > > First, i dislike the way compiz deal with options descriptions. Why put > this in the code? > > Just look how kde deal with this: kcfg file (xml files > in /usr/share/config.kcfg), it's much cleaner i think. > I would prefer one xml description file per plugin usable by configuration > tools. > > We can have tools that create gconf schemas and ini conf files based on > this xml files. > > I don't see any reason having such information in the code, but maybe i'm > missing something... > > Cedric > > _______________________________________________ > compiz mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/compiz
The problem is that we already have additional data in the plugins. So we should be consistent here and remove also the long/short decriptions of the option struct and or the plugin vtable and move it to an additional file or have everything in the plugin. A mixture of both is simply stupid. I can live with both because I can use bcop to generate what I want. Dennis _______________________________________________ compiz mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/compiz
