Re: [GD-General] A portable preferences library

[Colin F. <cp...@ea...>]

2003 December 6th
Saturday

I am satisfied with the idea that different applications will
require different schemes to store data, such as user preferences.

Nothing stops me from running an application from my keychain USB
memory device and having it store my user preferences there.
I can have as many versions of the application as I want, 
even identical versions, coexisting on my keychain USB memory
device, each with its own set of persisting data and preferences
for any number of "users" (which has nothing to do with the 
total number of users on any given host machine).  I can remove
the keychain USB memory device from a computer without leaving
any residual trace of the application, and I can attach to a
new machine without any installation procedure.

All of that existing flexibility suits me just fine.

I understand that other applications benefit from the window 
manager or file explorer knowing about them.  Some applications
will be less transient than the scenario I descibe above.

There will be applications that all users of a multi-user 
system (in the conventional sense) are likely to want to use,
and I can recognize the benefit of "scattering" preferences
to the persistent stores associated with each user.  In some
cases this facilitates user "roaming" to other machines.
(However, consider the fact that my keychain USB memory
device can "roam" to any machine with a USB port, regardless
of network connectivity and some domain controller to share
data about me.)

I'm not sure if I agree with the objection that multiple
installations of an application (including games), one per 
user, is necessarily bad!  One user might choose to mod the
game or apply patches...

I agree that acquiring patches and storing them on a CD-ROM
so one doesn't have to risk not being able to download them 
in the future (when the game company goes out of business ;-))
or the inconvenience of downloading in the future, is a 
good option.

Briefly, about the DivX codec or the DirectX version example...
I want to say that the product shouldn't ship when it requires
something the target operating system doesn't have by default,
but I know that's a little extreme.

Also, I'm not sure "XML rulez".  It's hard to beat the convenience
and simplicity of a text file that resembles an *.INI file.
Text editors are commonplace, but I've never really considered
using an XML editor (something that handles the tags transparently).
I'm not saying XML is bad, but I guess the idea of using an XML
editor as spontaneously and easily as, say, Notepad for really 
plain text files, is an idea that I haven't considered yet.

I want to make a comment regarding all of my posts on this subject:
I admit to irresponsible, superficial consideration of this issue;
soooo, if you haven't already, disregard everything I have said! :-)

--- Colin

cp...@ea...