On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 02:09, Cornelius Schumacher <schumac...@kde.org> wrote: > On Friday 31 December 2010 Trever Fischer wrote: >> >> We do not want to downplay the fact that some developer didn't put their >> .desktop file into the right category. The whole reason we switched from >> the previous structure was because people would just use the 'advanced' or >> 'misc' sections as a dumping ground and eventually *everything* started >> looking like an 'advanced' feature. > > What about not showing modules at all, which don't have the correct meta data? > If modules don't correctly identify themselves their quality might just not be > up to the level desirable for inclusion in system settings.
I have to disagree with that. I have come across some third-party KCMs in the Arch Linux AUR which, while maybe not well maintained, are still of good use, and may not have a better alternative. If the user has installed a KCM, then presumably they want to use it; to hide it from them entirely over something as trivial (functionally, at least) as this seems like a bad move, in my opinion, and is bound to cause bug/troubleshooting headaches. Instead, as I pointed out, the Lost and Found designation will at least make it clear to the astute that Something Is Wrong. Thoughts? - Jeffery MacEachern > -- > Cornelius Schumacher <schumac...@kde.org> > >>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe << > >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
