On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 at 17:34, Florian Müllner <fmuell...@gnome.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 5:36 PM Emmanuele Bassi via desktop-devel-list > <desktop-devel-list@gnome.org> wrote: > > > > If the answer to status icons is to adopt/adapt the appindicator API, > I'm also fine with that; > > I'm not. The StatusNotifier spec is seriously flawed, and I don't want > to support it unless at least the issues that were raised ten years > ago are addressed (the spec was put up for "review" on xdg-list, but > then any comments were hand-waived away with "if you don't like it, > don't implement it"). > You cut the part where I said the appindicator implementation should be changed. :-) I also completely agree that the StatusNotifier spec is broken by design; Canonical tried to fix it, but the changes ended up into the Unity silo, and drifted apart from the baseline KDE implementation (even though I think KDE changed their own code to match expectations with Unity after a while). Seriously, the spec is so crappy that there are two implementations > that are both compliant, but interpret the spec in different and > incompatible ways (see the implementation-specific handling in [0]). > The spec is so badly designed that we could literally claim that we're implementing it right now, if we just owned a name on the bus without plugging it to anything. If we want to support something *like* appindicators, it must be a new > and fixed API[1] that apps can port to, not the existing API, sorry. > I wholeheartedly agree. The problem remains that applications would now have to port to this new API, and support: - spangly new API - libappindicator - GtkStatusIcon in their code. Ciao, Emmanuele. -- https://www.bassi.io [@] ebassi [@gmail.com]
_______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
