[Desktop_architects] Deskop configuration management

[Philip Van Hoof]

On most platforms, Desktop configuration management is ugly. Yet it's a
feature that is often requested. The platform that implements the most
used desktop configuration management is Microsoft Windows with it's
Group Policy features*. These features also allow for "Remote" Desktop
Configuration Management. Which is a very important feature to support
when being software supplier for a customer who wants a huge amount of
desktop deployments. Examples are schools, governments, big
organisations and companies.

I'm not saying theirs is a good implementation. But the very reason it
'works', is because nearly all Windows desktop applications use 'one'
repository for storing configuration: The Windows Registry. They 'have'
a standard. And no, no it sure isn't a good one. But they 'have' one.

On the free desktop we have a different situation. Partly because we are
proud to offer choices to our users, we introduced a lot incompatible
techniques and repositories. This situation makes it harder to ever
cleanly implement such a feature.

I'm going to list a few systems that implement some form of
configuration management: OpenOffice.Org2, Mozilla, KDE (KConfig,
KConfigXT, KDMConfig), GNOME (GConf), UniConf, ACAP, Wine, X11
(Xsettings), Elektra, . . .


Maybe the time is right to do something about this situation?

After some discussion with various people who've been and or are in the
field of desktop configuration, the consensus seems to be that a
standardization phase needs to happen first.

Such a standard should minimally address (and decide about):

o. Standardization of the preferences naming and namespaces
   o. An organization that decides about shareable preferences
   
Another consensus was that the preference naming should happen in the
schema's. So ...

o. Standardization of the schema format
   o. Agreement on the preference naming (a node per path)
   o. Possibility to generate proxy code using the schema
   o. Possibility to define custom combined types
   o. Possibility to define list types
      o. Homogeneous lists
      o. Non-homogeneous lists
   o. Possibility to define recursive types
   o. Possibility to define enumerations

o. Standardization of a protocol and way of working
   o. Agreement on the process communication technology
   o. Agreement on the minimal features
      o. Location of schema handling
      o. Availability of notification of changes (and..)
      o. Availability of atomic changes and group changes
      o. Availability of atomic undo and redo
   o. Standardization of the protocol itself


--- 

A more detailed list can be found here:

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/2005-December/007609.html

"A" proposal (I'm not saying it should become "the" standard nor "the"
proposal. I'm open to changes and even different proposals):

https://svn.cronos.be/svn/deconf/deconf-spec/trunk/src/deconf-spec.xhtml


* Desktop configuration management and group policy:
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/2000/server/reskit/en-us/distrib/dsea_pt5_pndf.asp


-- 
Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend 
home: me at pvanhoof dot be 
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org 
work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be 
http://www.pvanhoof.be - http://www.x-tend.be