On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 00:31:13 +0100 Sean Finney <seanius@debian.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 23:01 +0100, Christoph Egger wrote: > > Sune Vuorela <nospam@vuorela.dk> writes: > > > (isn't it only icewm and ratpoison and blackbox we might 'lose' by > > > simply killing the debian menu) > > > > Last time I checked fluxbox and awesome where both debian menu only as > > well. > > instead of letting the tail wag the dog then with menu2desktop, wouldn't > it be better to cater to these WM's/DE's by providing a desktop2menu? > Still would feel like adding more layers where they should be removed > though... ... and leave any non-English speakers without any translation support for the key texts which tell the user what the app behind the menu actually does? Nice. Lots of menu files don't even bother with an icon. Why is it acceptable for window managers to use a menu which cannot support translation? Why cater to such buggy software? Effectively, these window managers are ignoring LC_ALL, LANGUAGE and LANG by not using a menuing system capable of supporting translation. Why should Debian put up with that any longer? It's arguably more work to make 'menu' support translation, and then implement that in all packages, than for these window managers to be converted to use the existing desktop files. At least desktop files are available in distributions other than Debian. There are a lot more translated desktop files than there are applications with menu files but no desktop files. As all menu files are untranslatable, any change to these WM's should be to require the use of desktop files on the basis that at least some of the title strings will already be translated in the desktop files. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgptEr4jLvTbX.pgp
Description: PGP signature