Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Jan 2011 22:18 UTC, submitted by alinandrei

Permalink for comment 459034
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:
2007-02-17
Because that's an outright stupid and horrible idea. What next? A configuration merge engine which asks the user in toolkit-independent manner how differences in two supposedly simultaneously managed config backends should be merged? "
Yes, I have reconsidered ... a better approach is for Ubuntu to write a replacement for QSettings class and qtconfig, such the the replacement libraries run with the rest of Qt only when GNOME runs. This maintains the dconf database as the repository of all GNOME settings, and Qt applications running under GNOME would see those settings translated from the dconf database.
If one also installed KDE on the same machine (perhaps for different users to use as their preferred desktop), when KDE ran the exact same Qt applications they would see the KDE desktop settings for that user, since KDE would be running the default QSettings class and qtconfig settings.
So, I agree, doing it that way around is better.
However, either way is still better than what Shuttleworth proposes, requiring Qt applications to be re-written to run under a Ubuntu-unique version of GNOME.