On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 19:02, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Well, we need everything that normal users will want to use. But I don't think the priority should be on switching to winecfg as soon as possible; on the contrary we should take the time to review the config, and use that opportunity to clean things up before we make the switch. So for instance if some parameters are too obscure to justify implementing them in winecfg, we should ask whether we really need them in the config at all, or whether we could handle them somehow automatically.
That sounds almost GNOME like Alexandre :) There are indeed a lot of massively obscure settings, "Perfect Graphics" would be one I'd vote for dropping. I've read the code, and I still can't figure out *exactly* what difference it'd make, especially to end user apps. There's no real way to explain "uses optimized raster ops" to an end user in a meaningful way.
Of course ideally Wine would not need any configuration at all. That might be a good long term goal.
Also we need to fix the code that uses config parameters to try to take into account dynamic changes as much as possible, so that you can make a change from winecfg and see it take effect at once, without having to restart your Wine session.
If we want to do that, it's worth deciding now, as it affects how winecfg operates. At the moment changes to the GUI are moved to and fro the structure in bulk, then the struct is saved to the registry, again in bulk. That lets us do "OK/Cancel". If we want instant apply, that complicates things.