On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 08:47:00PM +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 18 December 2014 at 20:25, Peter Oliver
> wrote:
> > Actually, I think it's emacs that shouldn't have a .desktop file of
> > its own.
>
> I don't mind *which* gets to stay, but I do think we need to nuke one
> of them. :)
Filed
On 18 December 2014 at 20:25, Peter Oliver
wrote:
> Actually, I think it's emacs that shouldn't have a .desktop file of
> its own.
I don't mind *which* gets to stay, but I do think we need to nuke one
of them. :)
Richard.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedorap
On 18 December 2014 at 15:50, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 18/12/14 15:44, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>
>> I'm a bit confused by this. For emacs the output is:
>>
>> emacs emacsOK OKOKOK Warning
>> OK
>> emacsclientemacsOK Warning Warning
On 18 December 2014 at 15:44, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> I'm a bit confused by this. For emacs the output is:
>
> emacs emacsOK OKOKOK Warning
> OK
> emacsclientemacsOK Warning Warning OK Warning
> Fai
On 18/12/14 15:44, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
I'm a bit confused by this. For emacs the output is:
emacs emacsOK OKOKOK Warning
OK
emacsclientemacsOK Warning Warning OK Warning
Failed
But emacsclient
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 01:22:04PM +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On 18 December 2014 at 10:18, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> >> > I get confused by the upstream vs. Fedora requirements,
> >> They are the same thing, no?
> > You tell me ;)
>
> Yes, they are :)
>
> >> Would a generated HTML page ... be
On 18 December 2014 at 12:36, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> As for my opinion, what I consider the real problem is the fact that the
> requirements are growing at all, or even that there ARE such requirements to
> begin with.
Right, I'm about done with this discussion. You've made your opinion
very clear
On 18 December 2014 at 10:18, Bastien Nocera wrote:
>> > I get confused by the upstream vs. Fedora requirements,
>> They are the same thing, no?
> You tell me ;)
Yes, they are :)
>> Would a generated HTML page ... be a useful thing to do?
> That would be useful indeed, as long as it doesn't requ
Bastien Nocera wrote:
> It's not the blogging. Blogging more often that the standards were upped
> and that next month's Fedora release won't accept your old AppData is
> fine. Blogging every month saying "we changed this little thing" is more
> the problem.
Other maintainers might appreciate the
- Original Message -
> On 18 December 2014 at 09:46, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > To be honest, the "slowly evolving" AppData requirements/changes have
> > also grated me the wrong way.
>
> Okay, so that's probably something we need to do something about.
> Would more frequent blogging hel
On 18 December 2014 at 09:46, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> To be honest, the "slowly evolving" AppData requirements/changes have
> also grated me the wrong way.
Okay, so that's probably something we need to do something about.
Would more frequent blogging help or hinder this?
> I get confused by the
- Original Message -
> On 13 December 2014 at 01:05, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > I think you should step back and consider this in context.
> > *Everything* we do in Fedora, and more generally speaking in open
> > source, is a work in progress.
>
> 100% agree, I couldn't ha
On 13 December 2014 at 01:05, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> I think you should step back and consider this in context.
> *Everything* we do in Fedora, and more generally speaking in open
> source, is a work in progress.
100% agree, I couldn't have said this better myself. The only way for
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 04:53:01PM -0700, Jerry James wrote:
> Mr. Hughes, I have a complaint.
>
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > If you want things to be pixel-crisp and your application ships only
> > one screenshot use 752x423. If you've got multiple screenshots use
Mr. Hughes, I have a complaint.
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
> If you want things to be pixel-crisp and your application ships only
> one screenshot use 752x423. If you've got multiple screenshots use
> 624x351, or integer multiples thereof. You can still ship random siz
tl;dr: AppStream builder will reject AppData screenshots smaller than 312x175.
If you want things to be pixel-crisp and your application ships only
one screenshot use 752x423. If you've got multiple screenshots use
624x351, or integer multiples thereof. You can still ship random sized
screenshots
16 matches
Mail list logo
