Re: Debian Menu policy leads to confusion
Bill Allombert wrote:
The main issue I have is that I did not make progress in implementing
the handling of third level sections in menu.
What is missing? There already are third level entries like "Apps >
System > Admin". Or am I confusing something?
We should avoid renaming sections if we can, this will cause more
problems than it is worth.
I was thinking about also renaming top level section. That is, have both
"Apps" and "Applications" at the same time until all entries migrate.
Packages maintainers could be asked to ship two menu files. We could
also have modified menu methods that would ignore entries in new menu,
and modify them in the same manner to ignore the old menu once the
transition finishes. Of course, I tested none of this, just an idea.
By renaming existing sections I wanted to make menu easier to navigate.
Besides, long forms ("Mathematical" instead of "Math" for example) are
also easier to translate and translations will have to be redone anyway.
Also we should not add 'Other' or 'Miscellaneous'. It is best if
developers ask here for a new section to be added than to use them.
I see. Will remove them.
Administration
Administrative and system configuration utilities, also tools for personal user settings.
aptitude, configure-debian, sysv-rc-conf
I find the name a bit confusing, beside this is what System should be
I agree. Already changed this in my latest draft to be merged with
"System". Will post it later.
(monitoring tool should me moved somewhere else IMHO).
By "monitoring tools" I meant tools like top and hal-device-manager, and
I still think they do belong in "System". At least this is where I would
expect them to be.
Data Management
Interactive database programs, collection managers, bibliography tools etc.
gaby, alexandria, mdbtools
It used to be "Databases". Did you renamed it because you expand the
scope ?
Yes. This was suggested by Frank Küster. He wrote:
to me "databases" sounds much
like mysql, M$Access and all that stuff I never use and know nothing
about, and I think we would serve our users to give the section a more
"end user" friendly name. What about "data management"?
Office
Office suites, address books, CRM, ERP, financial sofware.
openoffice.org, tinyerp-client, rubrica
Should we explicitly mention abiword and gnumeric ?
I will include "spreadsheets and word processors" in the description to
make it clear.
Do you have an estimate of the number of menu entry to change ?
Depends on the way the transition will be done, but pretty much all of
them. If it really has to be backward compatible, I will try to make it
so. I simply do not think that this is worth it, because transition of
entries will cause a lot of confusion anyway.
Reply to: