Re: some suggestions towards a Debian .desktop policy [Was: Warm up discussion about desktop files]
Le mercredi 20 avril 2011 à 10:37 +0200, Bernhard R. Link a écrit :
> > > 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[4].
> >
> > I disagree with this rule. Menus are editable, so if a program is meant
> > for an environment it should not be displayed by default in others. For
> > example, Thunar works perfectly fine outside Xfce, but you don’t want to
> > show it in KDE or GNOME.
>
> The point of that rule is that some classic Window Manager[1] should
> have all the installed programs available with sensible names.
> Such users prefer to use whatever program is best suited for the task
> and not the one looking in a specific way, so one wants to have all
> available. If one menu provider does want to limit that, it should offer
> some option to hide things without the right KDE/GNOME/GTK/Qt/Motif/Java
> Categories.
Are you serious? What kind of filtering rules could be used here?
> > If the entry has Terminal=true, it must also have
> > NoDisplay=true.
>
> Again, that should be an option in the menu provider. If the point is of
> hiding programs with an user-interface you do not like, that is the job
> of the environment not wanting those. (Especially as other providers
> cannot know when NoDisplay means "only for mime type handling" and when
> it is "deemed to ugly by someone").
It’s not only a problem of ugliness. The #1 usability problem with the
Debian menu is the huge amount of entries. If you repeat this mistake
with the freedesktop menus, a menu system that has been nice so far
(nice, not great) would become almost as crappy as the previous
situation.
Said otherwise: you’re entitled to improve the situation for crapwm if
you want, but if you break GNOME in the process, I don’t see this as a
win.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'
`-
Reply to: