Re: [AD] 5.0.0 final release plan

[Thomas Fjellstrom <tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On January 3, 2011, Elias Pschernig wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Matthew Leverton <meffer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 5:35 AM, Matthew Leverton <meffer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > For Linux, I see some people recommending /var/lib for shared data.
> > 
> > I guess that's supposed to be "state" data. Anyway, in line with my
> > previous comments, if this isn't something Linux supports, then I
> > don't think we should try to add support for it. SHARED_DATA could be
> > synonymous with USER_DATA on Linux.
> > 
> > We could simply warn that:
> > a) Not all paths are guaranteed to be unique. So you must use unique
> > file names if you don't want collisions. (Affects different paths
> > depending on the platform.)
> 
> Under Linux USER_DATA_PATH and USER_SETTINGS_PATH already are the same
> thing, so we should add that warning anyway.

No they aren't and if they are, someone did something wrong.

settings should be ~/.config/orgname/appname
data should be ~/.local/share/data/orgname/appname (or just 
~/.local/share/data/appname, or possibly even ~/.local/{orgname/}?appname

I see directories in each of the sub folders, but I think ~/.local/share/data 
is where the {orgname/}appname dir is supposed to be.

> > b) The shared folders are guaranteed to be writable by the user AND
> > permanent (i.e., not /tmp), but they aren't guaranteed to actually be
> > globally sharable if the platform doesn't natively support that.
> 
> Makes sense to me. I assume Windows would be the only platform where the
> shared folder could be actually shared by different users.

Ditto.

-- 
Thomas Fjellstrom
tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx