Why is it that it seems like Gnome seems to be implementing Windows bad practices? The last thing Linux needs is a Windows registry. One of the greatest benefits of Linux IMO is the ability to configure applications in config files… not having to use some custom tool to manage the configuration.
At least it’s got a fairly well defined schema unlike the Windows registry which is really just a very big dumping ground with a completely unenforced schema. You can just browse it and the settings are all there, complete with value type, default value and sometimes even a description. And it’s reactive too usually, so you change the setting and it applies immediately to running apps.
Tbh I’ll take that over KDE’s million config files spread out everywhere that are mostly undocumented and trashes your formatting and comments everytime it updates the file.
It’s actually a pretty good implementation of a registry overall.
Beginners won’t agree with you. Imagine their reaction after hearing that they have to edit a config file written in an obscure script language they never heard of
Dconf is amazing. Lots of tweaks in a centralised place, searchable, with naming that makes sense, and documentation. It’s standardised and it’s legible.
It’s not like the windows registry, in which stuff just gets dumped and isn’t standardised at all.
Config files can be a mess. They’re strewn around your system everywhere, aren’t always named in a way that even lets you know they’re a config file, you have to hunt them down individually, and syntax differs between them.
Saying it’s like the windows registry seems kinda true from a surface level, but all the things that are actually wrong with the Windows registry aren’t present in dconf.
Similar systems exist on other DEs, and this isn’t a new thing, it’s been around for a couple of decades.
What’s kinda neat is that I’ve seen NixOS users that will take the logfiles from dconf and use it to add into their configuration.nix and completely configure their DE on build.
linuxconfig.org
Top