Re: gpe system configuration

On 09 Aug 2002 18:05:57 +0100
Moray Allan <moray_at_sermisy.org> wrote:

> I'm doing native compiles, but using an NFS Debian chroot on a local
> iPAQ rather than using the Skiff Cluster.
I tried something like that, but serial ppp isn't fast enough to do
usable nfs..
Well actually, the problem is just that the cluster is usa localised and
telnet is slow..

> To speak for myself, I'm no longer convinced that having everything
> inside one big configuration program is actually the best idea. Once
> again I can point to GNOME 2, where the single configuration program
> previously used has been abandoned in favour of separate utilities. On a
> handheld having separate utilities preserves more screen space for the
> actual configuration widgets
Ok for the screen space, but the all in one app should be great for disk
space
>Separate utilities should be much less
> confusing to the user.
Well I dont know gnome 2, but I dont really think that "when you want to
configure something you have to go to the configuration place" is
user-confusing.
on the contrary, it adds imho uniformisation ( one of the aim of gpe isnt
it?)

> (With the old GNOME control centre, the UI went through various
> convolutions to try to show which settings had or hadn't been saved in a
> multi-page interface.
We are not obliged to make gnome's errors. I was more thinking about
MacOSX's Preference Panel.
> If, as at present, we have a configuration tab in
> gpe-appmgr then I don't see any problem with letting the user choose the
> area to configure there - otherwise we're likely to end up reproducing
> gpe-appmgr like behaviour in the configuration program.)

>
> I'd also suggest that (where possible) we follow GNOME 2's example by
> having configuration settings take immediate effect - see ipaqscreen
> 0.0.2 for this applied to screen-related settings. (Note however, that
> the UI of ipaqscreen could certainly be improved in other respects, e.g.
> by having a graphical representation of the different rotation choices.)
Anyone know a good artist that can make some lightweight ipaq pictures?

> We do need a central framework for saving configuration choices - I
> think there's a suggestion we have a gconf-like system, but with a more
> efficient back-end.
Then we shall discuss it together:
Such data should or should not take part of the usql database.
What functionality? ( I assume the gconf network capabilities are not usefull for us..)
Maybe we should use a better front-end than the gconf's Regedit style one.

>
> Even if we present different configuration areas to the user as separate
> programs in the menu / gpe-appmgr, it would be nice if we didn't end up
> duplicating too much code. Ideally, it might be possible to create a
> sysset like program that parsed configuration files, so that at run-time
> it could act as any of the necessary programs, from a single binary.
busybox rulez ;-)

Pierre

-- 
c'est quoi ce quatre et ce huit, dans mon adresse email ???