2009/4/10 Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org:
Le vendredi 10 avril 2009 à 15:15 +0200, Vincent Untz a écrit :
Just a stupid question... Why should we switch to GSettings? Ie, what
does it bring us that we can't do with gconf?
So far, I heard a performance argument. Anything else?
Getting rid
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tomas Frydrych a écrit :
Josselin Mouette wrote:
I don’t think maintaining a few more packages (especially packages that
already exist today) is a big effort. But it stills bother me if we are
going to propose two entirely different user
On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 14:24 +0200, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tomas Frydrych a écrit :
Josselin Mouette wrote:
I don’t think maintaining a few more packages (especially packages that
already exist today) is a big effort. But it stills bother me
Personally, we should cede the desktop to other projects like XFCE that
work very well with minimal hardware requirements. I've noticed a lot of
projects in GNOMEFiles with goals to write lightweight panels and what
not. 10 years is a reasonable amount of time to expect hardware
requirements to
Stef Walter wrote:
I need the help of a Desktop session genius (is there a gnome-session
mailing list?).
- gvfs has an SSH module which uses OpenSSH.
- OpenSSH checks for the presence of the SSH_AUTH_SOCK environment
variable in order to integrate with SSH agents.
-
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org wrote:
So far, I heard a performance argument. Anything else?
* The API for gconf is pretty awful, and could be a lot better for app
developers.
* Installing schemas into the config db is a big mess for
distributions and
