Re: Warm up discussion about desktop files [Was: Lintian check for missing desktop files?]
* Sune Vuorela <email@example.com> [110419 12:32]:
> On 2011-04-19, Bernhard R. Link <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > * Sune Vuorela <email@example.com> [110419 09:41]:
> >> On 2011-04-18, Bernhard R. Link <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> > Currently there is none of this. I think it makes no sense to discuss
> >> > if things should have desktop files or whether it makes sense to
> >> > remove the old working system.
> >> what do you miss from the xdg specs?
> > The "Desktop Entry Specification" mostly describes the format, with some
> > very short sentences about Name, GenericName and Comment.
> Name is the application name, as named by upstream
> GenericName is a more generic name of the type of application
> Comment is optional
> GenericName=Integrated Development Environment
What about nautilus.desktop's (at least in squeeze):
and no GenericName. Would that be a policy violation?
Is that allowed if has a restrictive OnlyShowIn=. Must programs
that are also useable outside that session type also have a menu
item with a less generic name?
> Comment could be something like
> Comment=Launch a terminal window
> Comment=Edit your text files
> Comment=Develop applications
I've seen quite some bug reports about those.
What should it contain? A verb phrase describing what?
(Might also help translations. The English text might be both an
imperative or an infinitive, the German translations seem to translate
it as infinitive clause).
> The OnlyShowIn/NotShowIn items should normally not be used, unless there
> is a tight integration between a DE and the app itself. e.g. a tool to
> configure the appearance of Plasma should probably have OnlyShowIn=KDE
What exceptions are there? Should there be a lintian warning about
What about NotShownIn? Is e.g. squeeze's gnome-screenshot.desktop's
a bug and should it have been OnlyShowIn=GNOME; or nothing at all?
> > "http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/menu.html/ch6.html".
> I guess one can write something similar.
> but basically it is syntax changes and
Well, I hope there is something similar, but getting this documentation
for users is very hard to get out of the xdg specs.
> > And in terms of policy I miss a better description of the Categories,
> > better rules how Name/GenericName/Comment should be written and when
> > OnlyShowIn/NotShownIn are to be used.
> Does my comments here clear it up for you? (then we can talk about
> making docs out of it)
Unless there are many bugs around currently, I think this rather needs
a policy for those fields rather then simply docs.
Bernhard R. Link