On Nov 24, 2007 9:30 PM, Gustavo Chain <g@...> wrote:
> El Sat, 24 Nov 2007 21:16:29 +0100
> "Lars Lindner" <lars.lindner@...> escribi=F3:
> > On Nov 24, 2007 8:22 PM, Yogiz <yogizz@...> wrote:
> > > On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 01:13:44 +0200
> > > Georgi Kirilov <kirilov.georgi.s@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > What storage mechanism do you think about? Did you consider
> > > > > GKeyFile?
> > > >
> > > > That's a very good idea. I haven't heard of it till now, but I
> > > > just checked what it is about, and it really does make sense.
> > > > First, it's part of glib so it's not to be considered a
> > > > dependancy in a GTK+ application. Second, it is definitely more
> > > > convenient than writing a parser from scratch. And third, it is
> > > > already used in .desktop files and icon themes, so it's to be
> > > > considered as a kind of a standard, I think.
> > > >
> > > > So, I vote for this!
> > >
> > > Reading this I checked out GKeyFile myself and I have to agree. It
> > > basically is plaintext configuring with a good and well-tried-out
> > > parser.
> > >
> > > I agree with using this, sorry I didn't check it before when
> > > mentioned.
> > Cool. I think GKeyFile lowers significantly lowers maintenance efforts
> > compared to a any self-written parser, which had to be tested for
> > correctness and stability.
> what about SQLite?
Just from the config saving standpoint it would be useful.
But what about those points:
-> Program doesn't start because of misconfiguration. User
has to use SQL to fix it.
-> You want to delete your data but not your configuration.
(Currently you just delete the sqlite DB file.)
-> Unix uses text files. GTK applications do use common
config storage mechanisms (e.g. GConf and GKeyFile).
Just saying "what about SQLite" is not a good argument...