[project-proposal] xfce4ring

[Brian J. Tarricone]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 4/25/2006 7:09 PM, Aaron wrote:
> On 4/25/06, Brian J. Tarricone <bjt23 at cornell.edu> wrote:
>>
>> 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?

MCS and gobject are unrelated.

> i feel like im missing something, but do you really need a manager to
> force feed the component its new .conf file?

The idea is to have a centralised datastore for the *desktop* to store
its applications.  At least, that was the point of MCS, though it's been
abused a bit.

Regardless, we need some sort of daemon to act as an XSETTINGS manager.
 No way around that.  Whether or not the settings manager (if any)
should be dual-purpose like that is another issue.

	-brian


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFETtvG6XyW6VEeAnsRArMEAKDQDLHRl6QvSUzzDQu4OSIdxXW2OwCg2t+h
Z61zdn2cSuRBfMczM7fRYb8=
=xljf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----