[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

some suggestions towards a Debian .desktop policy [Was: Warm up discussion about desktop files]

Some suggestions for a Debian .desktop policy[1]:

1) syntax according to freedesktop's Desktop Entry Specification
  [TODO: always the latest, fix some version and increase that at
  fixed points?]

2) Name must be a name properly name the program and be unique enough
   to be useable if multiple programs doing the same are in the menu.

3) Comment, if it exists, must be <...>[2]

4) Categories must be according to freedesktop's Desktop Menu
   Specification, appendix A [TODO: what version? Always latest?].

5) Categories must contain applicable KDE,GNOME,GTK,Qt,Motif,Java[3]
   so that a menu manager cat filter out things not matching
   the UI look&feel if wanted.

6) A .desktop file is allowed to break above rules if is has a
   OnlyShownIn limiting it to some environment(s) it belongs to.

7) In case of 6) there must be a .desktop file with the same
   command and adhering to this policy, unless that command cannot
   be run (or cannot work) outside this environment[3].

8) An alternative .desktop as in 7) might have a NotShownIn,
   otherwise it must not have one.

What do you think?

	Bernhard R. Link

[1] As some people always complain about the need to create menu files,
    let's try to look how .desktop files can get in shape that they might
    replace menu files in some future.

[2] I'm still looking for some definition of what that should look like.
    I remember many bugs files about those in the past, but no
    definition but "something like this 3 examples and I recognize it if
    it is wrong". For example is it imperative? or an infitive clause?
    or something else? What exactly does "should not be redundant with
    the values of Name and GenericName" from D-E-S mean?

[3] What does Xaw programs use? And what SDL programs?

[4] I suggest a lintian warning for this for everything that has not
    "Applet" or "Settings" in Categories.

Reply to: