fso bug/oddity

[Tilman Baumann]

Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:

> It's important though that people 
> understand why we need all these abstractions. It's not because we love high 
> level interfaces, it's because we need to prepare for application 
> _integration_.

Yea, but there are things which are already solved and people are used 
to work with them. Integration could well go over the top.
As i probably already said. I like the effort, but some things are 
better left alone. :)
Not that i have some spcific critique right now, but i could easyly see 
fso going in that direction. That's why i reacted this way in this case, 
i thought it had happened. *g*

I see fso walking a fine line between genius and insanity. :)
settingsd vs. gconf would be one of these cases. I just refused to 
really think about it yet, so i don't really know how much sense it 
makes. I think i would not like the outcome... (gconf is horrible, but 
it was there long enough to be considered a standard...)
pimd vs. eds the same...

-- 
Drucken Sie diese Mail bitte nur auf Recyclingpapier aus.
Please print this mail only on recycled paper.