[Lazarus] Lazarus config woes

[Hans-Peter Diettrich]

michael.vancanneyt at wisa.be schrieb:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
> 
>> michael.vancanneyt at wisa.be schrieb:
>>
>>>> IMO the IDE should look for a configuration in the current (EXE) 
>>>> directory first, and only into the common directory when no config 
>>>> can be found there.
>>>
>>> Well, definitely not on Unix. On unix, the EXE directory should never 
>>> contain config files.
>>
>> I dare to disagree. A SVN checkout is writeable, and this is where the 
>> EXE is stored, along with the related source files. Consequently the 
>> config should be stored there as well.
> 
> No, no and once more: no.
> 
> This is a typical Windows user reasoning which is total nonsense on unix.
> You should never ever leave a config file or an executable in a source
> directory, it's plain wrong to do so. I don't know a single unix 
> application
> that does this.

Reality check, please!

Your considerations apply to standard installations only, not to SVN 
checkouts. Standard installations, regardless of the OS, should have 
separate *and versioned* places for sources, binaries and settings.

> Config files belong in 1 of 3 places:
> 
> under /etc/myapp
> under ~/.myapp
> under ~/config/myapp
> 
> If you want to support multiple configurations, create subdirectories of
> these directories, period.

Bullshit :-(

Windows suffered, and still suffers, from a monolithic registry - and 
this exactly is what you suggest with version-subdirectories.

SVN checkouts and other experimental stuff should reside in user-land, 
fully contained inside their own directory tree, so that they are 
independent from any parallel installations.

> Don't try to force Windows habits on Unix users.

I'm not Windows specific at all. Wherever multiple versions of the same 
application are installed, every installation must have its private 
configuration. So it's only natural to keep that configuration together 
with the source and binaries, in user-land.

DoDi