ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

[Christian Dywan <christian.dywan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hey everyone,

the subject of settings has come up again recently and there've been
Ubuntu.Components Settings under development which were blocking on CI
for some time. Whilst it was under development some people tried out the
new Qt.labs.settings which then came out. So it makes sense to review
both fully side by side now to see what technology we prefer for storing
app settings.

Zsombor, Florian and I discussed it initially. Nekhelesh, Michael,
Olivier and Michał got a chance to see it to get obvious questions
sorted out. Finally we want all interested app devs to have the chance
to check it out, and review it before making a decision.

The basic requirements are
1) Store app settings
2) Easy to use
3) Can later be extended to support sync with the cloud

Both Ubuntu.Components Settings (based on U1Db) and Qt.labs.settings
(exchangeable backends) can feasibly be updated to support sync in the
next iteration - based on the technical evaluation.

Qt.labs.settings is officially experimental API and not supported by Qt.
But it would make apps work more easily with other Qt platforms which is
an obvious advantage. So that's the kind of compromise choosing
Qt.labs.settings would mean.

This nice document was prepared by Florian with examples at the bottom
comparing side-by-side the different APIs

Please everyone interested have a look

https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/document/d/1ZC4whqRT1Hf1xg7czvElUWSJ6JzkKMdWamt56Vhl1eU/edit#heading=h.132afdtxso0j

Question to all reviewers

- Which API do you prefer given the examples and features for use in all
of your apps
- Please point out any benefits and drawbacks you see with either API
and reply to this thread

Regards,
Christian

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature