[project-proposal] xfce4ring

[Aaron]

On 4/25/06, Brian J. Tarricone <bjt23 at cornell.edu> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Stephan Arts wrote:
> > Currently (xfce 4.0 4.2 and 4.4) uses the xfce-mcs-manager for
> > configuration purposes.
> >
> > Though Xfce 4.4 is still at BETA stage, i would like to start a
> > discussion about the development of a possible successor of
> > xfce-mcs-manager.
> >
> > Thinks i think we should be able to do with it are:
> > (Thanks to ElAngelo)
> >
> > 1. Support MetaThemes
> > 2. Support dnd for theme installation
> > 3. Plugin grouping, ordering plugins by group
> > 4. Allow writing plugins with scripting-languages like python / ruby / perl.
> >
> > 1) - (Complete theme-packages for wm, gtk, icons and perhaps even wallpaper)
> >
> > 2) - ( ~/.themes is too complicated for most new users)
> >
> > 3) - (this way we can make the GUI less cluttered.)
> >
> > 4) - (This probably means we cannot use gmodule for it anymore)
>
> #1 and #2 are totally irrelevant to whether or not we use
> xfce-mcs-manager or something else.  These features could easily be
> added to the UI settings MCS plugin if someone wanted to take the time
> to do it.
>
> #3 could be bolted on to the current MCS manager, as was discussed a few
> weeks ago.
>
> #4 could be done by writing bindings for libxfce4mcs, shuffling a few
> functions around (moving stuff out of xfce-mcs-manager and into
> libxfce4mcs), and writing other-language plugin loaders for the MCS
> manager binary.
>
> My point here is not to say that we don't need a new settings manager --
> we certainly do -- but the issues you've mentioned are not reason enough
> to throw away xfce-mcs-manager, and in fact are doable by extending
> xfce-mcs-manager.  (But there are other reasons we should throw it away.)
>
>         -brian
does anyone know about a good guide or document with the diffrences
between gobject and mcs? also, does anyone know about what month/year
the discussion for hte implemntation of the mcs manager was, and how
usefull it would be to read over?

i feel like im missing something, but do you really need a manager to
force feed the component its new .conf file? wouldn't editing the
conf, then poking the application with a signal to reload the conf be
much less memory intensive, and simpler? or was there some
cross-platform issue there?