3 ms·

WTF!?! This already exists. Why you are reinventing the wheel again?!? A lot of programs already implement the XDG Base Directory Specification[1], putting th

WTF!?! This already exists. Why you are reinventing the wheel again?!? A lot of programs already implement the XDG Base Directory Specification[1], putting the configuration in the .config directory. These programs should just follow the ALREADY EXISTING specification. If you want to understand it, the arch wiki[2] have a good explanation about all the directories. [1] https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-... [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/XDG_Base_Directory https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/XDG_Base_Directory

mcint 3y ago
This proposal calls for developers to adopt a standard within their projects, as opposed to addressing where configuration files for installed software should live within a user's home directory. https://dotmeta.org https://dotmeta.org, note projects This site exists to advocate that software libraries look for their config files in .meta directories of projects. This is avoid making a mess in the root directory of projects, as this tweet laments. https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-..., note users ## Basics The XDG Base Directory Specification is based on the following concepts: - There is a single base directory relative to which user-specific data files should be written. This directory is defined by the environment variable $XDG_DATA_HOME.