Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[protege-owl] Insane Java preferences directory names

Timothy Redmond tredmond at stanford.edu
Mon Jan 18 18:38:06 PST 2010


I think that I agree with everything that you have said. I often tinker 
with eclipse workspace settings in this way. I guess that the line that 
I would draw is that the Protege team would probably not want to support 
this. In many cases we wouldn't even know what the user is really doing.

-Timothy

Christoph LANGE wrote:
> 2010-01-17 20:56 Timothy Redmond <tredmond at stanford.edu>:
>   
>> So first of all, the fact that we are telling people how to work with
>> preferences outside the Protege api indicates a defect in Protege.
>>     
>
> Not necessarily.  I expect from any software that I have access its preference
> via the filesystem, without starting the software.  This is appropriate in
> scenarios such as automated deployment, working around bugs, etc.
>
>   
>> We probably shouldn't be encouraging people to look here.
>>     
>
> I didn't particularly feel _encouraged_.  For me that information was very
> valuable, because I screwed up my Protégé preferences by running several
> unstable versions with different reasoner and plugin default settings.  The
> only solution I could think of was deleting the preferences.  So besides some
> problems with unstable versions (hey, that's why they are called unstable!),
> there is nothing that I would particulary blame on Protégé.
>
>   
>> Second, the fact that the file names are extreme is internal design choice
>> of the Sun Java Preferences implementation.
>>     
>
> Maybe not.  I ran other Java-based software that created sane directory names.
> SWOOP, for example, uses org.mindswap.swoop.  SWOOP is quite old, so maybe the
> problem is due to Protégé (I tested 4.0 and 4.1) using a newer Java
> Preferences API.
>
>   
>>>>
>> This being said - we are thinking of putting these preferences in some
>> xml format inside the ~/.Protege directory.
>>     
>
> This is of course preferable in any case.
>
>   
>> Such an xml file would be more likely to be readable though this is not
>> necessarily an advantage. We would have to even more strenuously
>> recommend that people leave this file alone.
>>     
>
> If you are thinking about average scenarios and the average user, this is a
> reasonable recommendation.  But my case above is not average, and as a Linux
> user I tend to try fixing such problems myself ;-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Christoph
>
>   




More information about the protege-owl mailing list