On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 05:54, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 04:07:56AM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
>
> | Only GNOME applications should be in the GNOME Applications menu.
>
> Why?!
>
Rationale (and a real-world example):
Both KDE and GNOME are attempting to make a compl
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:54:13PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 04:07:56AM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
>
> | Only GNOME applications should be in the GNOME Applications menu.
>
> Why?!
Yea, I thought that was somewhat odd. The only reason the non KDE items
are be
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 04:07:56AM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
| Only GNOME applications should be in the GNOME Applications menu.
Why?!
Cameron.
On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 22:50, AKL. Mantas Kriauciunas wrote:
> Debian has a usability problem - it's hard to start lots of programs,
> installed from debian packages, because simple users just can't find
> them in menu.
> Standart debian menu entry isn't good solution for user-friendly
> desktops,
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Billy Biggs wrote:
> Bruce Sass ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > The above is just the tip of the iceberg with respect to i18n, I had
> > roughly the same size savings when I was removing translations from
> > KDE2 files---KDE3 has more files, more translations per file, and I
> > ha
Chris Cheney wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 12:28:29PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
>> The Categories= field (to place .desktop files into menu hierarchies) is
>> AFAIK not used at all by KDE, although I think Gnome may support it.
> The above statements are probably true of KDE 3.1 since it d
Bruce Sass ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> The above is just the tip of the iceberg with respect to i18n, I had
> roughly the same size savings when I was removing translations from
> KDE2 files---KDE3 has more files, more translations per file, and I
> haven't looked at Gnome.
Bruce,
I can't figure
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
<...>
> Of course the system can and will be improved, once it is generally adopted.
Improving it at the outset will speed up its adoption.
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Chris Cheney wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 05:47:17PM -0700, Bruce Sass wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 01:28:51PM -0700, Bruce Sass wrote:
> > <...>
> > > .desktop files are not bloated... period. They include i18n which for
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 01:11:12PM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
| It is supported and used in KDE-3.2beta. KDE-3.2 should be released in
| January.
[...]
| Again, please have a look at KDE-3.2. I am currently using the KDE CVS
| debian snapshots. KDE stores all it's desktop files in /usr/
Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 04:12:58AM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> | This is not true. Almost all features are being used in current KDE and
> | to some degree by current GNOME. Could you please give examples?
> The Categories= field (to place .desktop files int
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 05:47:17PM -0700, Bruce Sass wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 01:28:51PM -0700, Bruce Sass wrote:
> <...>
> > .desktop files are not bloated... period. They include i18n which for
> > you is bloat since you obviously can communica
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 09:37:51AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 01:01, Marc Wilson wrote:
>
> > Not at all. You want to enforce on $RANDOM_UPSTREAM the idea that they
> > have to support .desktop files. That is *not* going to work. Debian does
> > not have that sort of po
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 06:33:52PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 04:11:08PM -0600, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > All that would do is make it consitently different from all other
> > distributions. Assuming that they listed the proper Categories
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Chris Cheney wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 01:28:51PM -0700, Bruce Sass wrote:
<...>
> .desktop files are not bloated... period. They include i18n which for
> you is bloat since you obviously can communicate in English.
"not bloated... period", yet you admit the translation
Daniel Burrows ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 04:11:08PM -0600, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > All that would do is make it consitently different from all other
> > distributions. Assuming that they listed the proper Categories in their
>
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 04:11:08PM -0600, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> All that would do is make it consitently different from all other
> distributions. Assuming that they listed the proper Categories in their
^^
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 12:28:29PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 04:12:58AM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> | Cameron Patrick wrote:
> |
> | > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:57:29PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> | >
> | > | > Because you gain *nothing*
> | > |
> |
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 01:28:51PM -0700, Bruce Sass wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > Scripsit Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> >
> > > > In which format shall application packages store
> > > > their menu information.
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 11:42:25AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Worse yet - after demanding that, we probably will rewrite their
> .desktop files - We will still (I hope) strive to provide menus
> consistent with our way of doing things. One of the main roles of the
> maintainers of a distribution i
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 04:05:50AM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> > Because nobody but KDE and Gnome use those features and they
> > already support .desktop files.
>
> How would e.g. the lyx debian package get an i18nized menu entry into the
> menu of either KDE or Gnome. YOU HAVE TO PRO
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 10:01:39PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 09:08:38PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 10:29:24PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:31:17PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > > We don't have to map them o
Marc Wilson dijo [Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 10:01:39PM -0800]:
> > > Other way around. You have to pass .desktop files through to the
> > > menu-methods in a fashion that allows them to generate menus digestible to
> > > applications not supporting .desktop files.
> >
> > You seem to have lost the con
On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 01:01, Marc Wilson wrote:
> Not at all. You want to enforce on $RANDOM_UPSTREAM the idea that they
> have to support .desktop files. That is *not* going to work. Debian does
> not have that sort of power.
>
> On the other hand, the idea that an application desiring to par
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 09:08:38PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 10:29:24PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:31:17PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > We don't have to map them onto anything. We just have to pass them
> > > through to the menu met
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 04:12:58AM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
| Cameron Patrick wrote:
|
| > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:57:29PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
| >
| > | > Because you gain *nothing*
| > |
| > | Are you claiming that everyone who says that .desktop has technical
| > | ad
Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:57:29PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
>
> | > Because you gain *nothing*
> |
> | Are you claiming that everyone who says that .desktop has technical
> | advantages is a liar? These features actually do not exist in the
> | desktop format? (It m
Bruce Sass wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
>> Freedesktop standard supporting
>> systems are probably used by 90% of all Debian desktop users.
>
> Unsubstantial, and probably bullshit.
Maybe you are just incapable of finding arguments and have to resort to bad
langu
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
>
> > > Have you quantified the "bloat" you are speaking about? Can the same
> > > argument not apply to any i18n effort?
>
> > Yes, using KDE2. The script removed
Scripsit Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Oops, possible meaning-disturbing typo:
> implementation engineering will be necessary in order to prevent bloat
> my maintainer scripts and standard /usr/share/doc/* contents.
s/my/by/
--
Henning Makholm "Det er du nok f
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 10:29:24PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:31:17PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>> > We don't have to map them onto anything. We just have to pass them
>> > through to the menu methods in a fashion that al
Scripsit Isaac Clerencia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I sincerely hope that some day further development of Debian's great
> package management system will make localepurge fully obsolete.
I've been wondering whether the Right solution to this kind of
problems might be to invent some concept of "glue
Scripsit Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > Have you quantified the "bloat" you are speaking about? Can the same
> > argument not apply to any i18n effort?
> Yes, using KDE2. The script removed any lines with "[""]" in
> them from KDE files (was poss
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 10:29:24PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:31:17PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > We don't have to map them onto anything. We just have to pass them
> > through to the menu methods in a fashion that allows them to generate
> > .desktop files.
>
> O
Isaac Clerencia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I sincerely hope that some day further development of Debian's great
> package management system will make localepurge fully obsolete.
Yes, there are plans for a generic install-time file exclusion mechanism
in dpkg, according to Adam Heath (head dpkg
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 05:08, Dagfinn Ilmari MannsÃker wrote:
> localepurge - Automagically removing unnecessary locale data
From localepurge README.Debian:
**
Please note, that this tool is a hack which is *not* integrated with
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:31:17PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> We don't have to map them onto anything. We just have to pass them
> through to the menu methods in a fashion that allows them to generate
> .desktop files.
Other way around. You have to pass .desktop files through to the
menu-met
Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd think that ideally, there could be some system-wide setting that
> specified which languages to support (e.g. `english, french, korean'),
> and upon installation, i18nalised files would be filtered to strip out
> any `unsupported' languages. I suppose
Cameron Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I seem to recall reading a number of complaints /from users/ in the BTS,
> requesting .desktop files precisely because they are i18nalised. Others
> have suggested expanding the current Debian menu definition to handle
> i18n. That, to me, sounds like
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 07:36:15PM -0700, Bruce Sass wrote:
| > Have you quantified the "bloat" you are speaking about? Can the same
| > argument not apply to any i18n effort?
|
| Yes, using KDE2.
[...]
| Yes, the same argument applies to all i18n efforts.
|
| I18n is great, until disk usage and
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Have you quantified the "bloat" you are speaking about? Can the same
> argument not apply to any i18n effort?
Yes, using KDE2. The script removed any lines with "[""]" in
them from KDE files (was possible at the time without incurring
breakage) and wo
Scripsit Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > Scripsit Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> > If you don't think the problem being discussed matters, why are you
> > participating in the discussion?
>
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
>
> > > In which format shall application packages store
> > > their menu information.
>
> > It doesn't matter,
>
> If you don't think the problem being discus
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 05:18:21PM -0600, Billy Biggs wrote:
> Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 09:49:54AM -0600, Billy Biggs wrote:
> > > Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > >
> > > > It's "pass a few more text fields through to the menu methods, and
> > >
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 11:47:28AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 09:49:25PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> | Alternate approaches (that involve significantly less work)
>
> That's the bit that I (and presumably others) am not convinced about.
> You keep making this as
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 05:18:21PM -0600, Billy Biggs wrote:
| Agreed on that, but it's not rewriting all of the menu package, which
| is what I felt your post implied. Rewriting all menu files is fairly
| trivial and does not have to be done all at once.
It should also be fairly easy to get i
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 09:49:25PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
| Alternate approaches (that involve significantly less work)
That's the bit that I (and presumably others) am not convinced about.
You keep making this assertion, but with little to back it up. Have
you, e.g., looked at the Catego
Scripsit Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Straw man, again. The proposal was to rewrite all menu entries as
> .desktop files -
Yes. That is a straw man.
--
Henning Makholm"Nej, hvor er vi altså heldige! Længe
leve vor Buxgører S
Scripsit Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> > In which format shall application packages store
> > their menu information.
> It doesn't matter,
If you don't think the problem being discussed matters, why are you
participating in the discussion?
Scripsit Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:57:29PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > Are you claiming that everyone who says that .desktop has technical
> > advantages is a liar?
> No. I'm claiming that everyone who says that "only by using .desktop
> exclusively ca
Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 09:49:54AM -0600, Billy Biggs wrote:
> > Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> >
> > > It's "pass a few more text fields through to the menu methods, and
> > > use them to generate .desktop files" versus "rewrite everything".
> >
>
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 09:49:54AM -0600, Billy Biggs wrote:
> Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > It's "pass a few more text fields through to the menu methods, and use
> > them to generate .desktop files" versus "rewrite everything".
>
> You sure it's "rewrite everything"? A script to
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:57:29PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:51:53AM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
>
> > > You do realize that the desktop standard has more features than the debian
> > > menu system? Like i1
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Tom wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:06:48PM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> > freedesktop entry features > debian menu file features
> >
> > Therefore you can do a lossless transition from .desktop to menu, but not
> > the other way around. It makes sense to use th
On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:51:53AM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
>
> >> You do realize that the desktop standard has more features than the
> >> debian menu system? Like i18n, icon theming, dynamic construction
Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> It's "pass a few more text fields through to the menu methods, and use
> them to generate .desktop files" versus "rewrite everything".
You sure it's "rewrite everything"? A script to parse all .desktop
files in /usr/share/applications and output the same
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:06:48PM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:51:53AM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
>
> >> You do realize that the desktop standard has more features than the
> >> debian menu system? Like i18n, icon them
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:57:29PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
| > Because you gain *nothing*
|
| Are you claiming that everyone who says that .desktop has technical
| advantages is a liar? These features actually do not exist in the
| desktop format? (It may be so; I have no firsthand informat
Scripsit Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:51:53AM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> > You do realize that the desktop standard has more features than the debian
> > menu system? Like i18n, icon theming, dynamic construction of a menu
> > hierarchy based on use
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:51:53AM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
>> You do realize that the desktop standard has more features than the
>> debian menu system? Like i18n, icon theming, dynamic construction of a
>> menu hierarchy based on user /Desktop system prefer
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:06:48PM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> freedesktop entry features > debian menu file features
>
> Therefore you can do a lossless transition from .desktop to menu, but not
> the other way around. It makes sense to use the .desktop standard.
I know what you mea
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:51:53AM +0100, Moritz Moeller-Herrmann wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 03:02:42PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
>
> >> Except that AFAIK .desktops are still semantically richer than the
> >> existing Debian system, and have more momentum behind them outside of
> >> De
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 03:02:42PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
>> Except that AFAIK .desktops are still semantically richer than the
>> existing Debian system, and have more momentum behind them outside of
>> Debian. Upstream packages are much more likely to ship to .d
Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Billy Biggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Steve Greenland ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>>> On 04-Dec-03, 14:44 (CST), Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>>> > There's now a standard used by KDE and GNOME which has more features
>>> > than the Debian menu system.
>
>>
Marc Wilson wrote:
>Just as a data point, you do realize that freedesktop.org is a wholly owned
>and operated subsidiary of RedHat, right?
Now this just isn't true.
>Oh, you don't think so? Take a look at who their god-king is. Take a look
>at where their mailing lists are hosted. Karsten has d
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 01:40:58AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> -- until there exists a mechanism to convert .desktop entries into
> things that the back-end WM's can grok, we are stymied
Agreed.
> (since we have a system that works, however imperfectly, and dropping
> support for these win
On Sat, 2003-12-06 at 16:41, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 06:02:16PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > I remember about a message from a guy from RedHat saying more or less
> > that he see no point in supporting an environment/wm that do not
> > follow the new standards decided at freed
On Sun, 2003-12-07 at 08:41, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 06:02:16PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > I remember about a message from a guy from RedHat saying more or less
> > that he see no point in supporting an environment/wm that do not
> > follow the new standards decided at freed
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 06:02:16PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> I remember about a message from a guy from RedHat saying more or less
> that he see no point in supporting an environment/wm that do not
> follow the new standards decided at freedesktop.org...
Just as a data point, you do realize that
Cameron Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> A standard like .desktop or the Debian menu system we have now /is/ a
> good thing; we also need a way to make those menu hierarchies available
> to applications which cannot and will not read them directly (hence the
> "weird formats" that I men
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 11:25:31AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
| > What's your point? The window managers don't /need/ to be changed - or
| > at least they shouldn't. They don't natively support Debian's menu
| > system, they don't natively support .desktop files, and are unlikely to
| > ever do e
Cameron Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 10:05:57AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
>
> | Sure. However, I use WindowMaker since several years now, and apart
> | from bug fixes, I did not notice real changes over years (the
> | changelog does not speak otherwise, it's almost o
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 10:05:57AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
| Sure. However, I use WindowMaker since several years now, and apart
| from bug fixes, I did not notice real changes over years (the
| changelog does not speak otherwise, it's almost only about bugs and
| i18n updates).
|
| About black
Marc Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 12:57:53PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
>> > Some or all of: twm, pdmenu, blackbox, afterstep, fluxbox, gtk-menu,
>> > wmaker, fvwm2, enlightenment, etc, consult /etc/menu-methods for more.
>> > There are dozens of programs that use the
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 16:48:28 -0500, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[I whole heartedly agree with Joey here. I am just adding a few
remarks]
> No, you're going about this backwards. Get the code written. Get the
> policy for Debian menu layout using .desktop files written. Make
> sure that
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 11:09:56 -0600, Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 04:08:41AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> > ... It only stands to reason that if both the KDE and Gnome
>> > desktop camps wish to formalize on the format that we should
>> > adopt it as well,
Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> doesn't seem to be available in a documented way to people who have
> their own $HOME/.fvwm2rc)
FTR, you can do something like this:
Read /etc/X11/fvwm/menudefs.hook
AddToMenu Applications "Applications" Title
+ "&Deb
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 12:57:53PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > Some or all of: twm, pdmenu, blackbox, afterstep, fluxbox, gtk-menu,
> > wmaker, fvwm2, enlightenment, etc, consult /etc/menu-methods for more.
> > There are dozens of programs that use the debian menus that would have
> > no reason t
Em Sex, 2003-12-05 Ãs 11:32, Felipe Almeida Lessa escreveu:
> Now I'm using GNOME, but some time ago I have used XFce, Window Maker and
> others. IMHO, we could have a script that converted new .desktop to old-style
> Debian Menu while the WM don't understand .desktop. Or even better, we could
> ma
Em Qua, 2003-12-03 Ãs 18:31, Zenaan Harkness escreveu:
> > If the Debian menu system can't represent what you want, then we should
> > either extend it so that it does, or get rid of it. It makes no sense
> > to support two sets of menu entries throughout the distribution.
>
> I agree. I would li
Em Sex, 2003-12-05 Ãs 19:48, Joey Hess escreveu:
> > I see only one -- duplicate work, which has been beaten to death already.
> > But since you insist on my opinion ...
>
> Nowhere in Herbert's response to bug #219304 does he talk about
> "duplicate work". He's quite clearly talking about duplica
Henning Makholm wrote:
> Yes, so people got wiser along the way. Isn't that supposed to be what
> happens in these discussions?
I'm still seeing the same old same old in eg, Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > If you think that it's so obvious, why don't you start by addressing my
> > objections in the quoted bug report?
> >
> I see only one -- duplicate work, which has been beaten to death already.
> But since you insist on my opinion ...
Nowhere in
Scripsit Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 08:05:34PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > Step 2: Packagers can now chose to supply .desktop files instead of
> > the Debian format, with a versioned dependency on menu.
> I can see no reason to proceed any further t
Scripsit Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Henning Makholm wrote:
> > The proposal is to enhance update-menus such that it knows how to
> > parse .desktop files and feed the information from them
> > transparently to menu methods that expect the Debian native
> > format.
> The head of this thread i
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 08:05:34PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > You speak of a transition, but I see no transition plan here.
>
> What do you expect from a "transition plan" then?
>
> Step 1a: Update menu infrastructure such that packages can transparently
> supply either .desktop fil
Henning Makholm wrote:
> Evidently, so that's not what is proposed. The proposal is to enhance
> update-menus such that it knows how to parse .desktop files and feed
> the information from them transparently to menu methods that expect
> the Debian native format. Then debian-native menu systems wou
Hi, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> Are they strong divergences on the goal to reach and the method to
> follow between Debian and freedesktop.org?
There don't seem to be.
But, assuming that we assume that .desktop files are The Future (they
have technical advantages over our menu files, and Debian is abou
Hi, Herbert Xu wrote:
> If you think that it's so obvious, why don't you start by addressing my
> objections in the quoted bug report?
>
I see only one -- duplicate work, which has been beaten to death already.
But since you insist on my opinion ...
The fact is that it isn't. At time X, which is
Scripsit Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > It doesn't need to be done in two days, does it? If new packages start
> > directly with .desktop and others packages move to .desktop in the
> > next year, it does not seems to be an awful load of extra work.
> If that happened then
Mathieu Roy wrote:
> If it is just a matter of time, the transition can be done step by
> step: the first step is just to say that this transition should be
> done.
>
> It doesn't need to be done in two days, does it? If new packages start
> directly with .desktop and others packages move to .desk
Mathieu Roy wrote:
> >> So far there has been a lot of support for the .desktop standard
> >> effort. Which systems do you refer to that are not supporting,
> >> adopting, or intending to adopt the .desktop standard?
> >
> > Some or all of: twm, pdmenu, blackbox, afterstep, fluxbox, gtk-menu,
>
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 04:08:41AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > ... It only stands to reason that if both the KDE and Gnome desktop
> > camps wish to formalize on the format that we should adopt it as
> > well, if only as an extension of our menu system. We would
> > have to generate .deskto
On 05-Dec-03, 05:54 (CST), Mathieu Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > As for me, I'm happy to provide either my current menu files, which are
> > supported by all of the DE/WM systems in Debian, *or* .desktop files,
> > *when* they are supported by al
Em Fri, 5 Dec 2003 21:55:21 +0800, Cameron Patrick escreveu:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 01:17:08PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> | Thing is, none of this matters. If upstream support .desktop files,
> | then we just run them through the script that converts them to Debian
> | menu entries whil
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 01:17:08PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
| Thing is, none of this matters. If upstream support .desktop files,
| then we just run them through the script that converts them to Debian
| menu entries while installing. dh_installmenu would be a good place to
| do this.
|
| Th
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 03:02:42PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> | Yeah, inverted the sense, you get the idea. We need both tools, at
> | which point there's no longer a reason not to just continue using the
> | existing Debian menu system.
>
> Except that AFAIK .desktops are still semantically
On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 04:08:41 -0600, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
escreveu:
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:18:46 -0600, Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 04:49:45PM -0200, Felipe Almeida Lessa
> > wrote:
> >> I think only one thing is blocking the whole idea o
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Billy Biggs wrote:
>> So far there has been a lot of support for the .desktop standard
>> effort. Which systems do you refer to that are not supporting,
>> adopting, or intending to adopt the .desktop standard?
>
> Some or all of: twm, pdmenu, blackbox, aft
Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> As for me, I'm happy to provide either my current menu files, which are
> supported by all of the DE/WM systems in Debian, *or* .desktop files,
> *when* they are supported by all (or at least most) the DE/WM systems in
> Debian.
If everybody waits the .
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
