On 4 March 2018 at 12:25, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> This new opt-in style has never been a good idea. The software features
> an "All" button, which doesn't show all packages, which is misleading.
It's not misleading; gnome-software is an application installed, not a
package installer. To anyone
On 03/05/2018 10:25 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> AppData packaging guidelines [1] requires every package to run
> "appstream-util validate-relax". Does this check fail when the icon has
> not valid size?
No, because the icon comes from the .desktop file and 'appstream-util
validate ... appdata.xml' on
Dne 2.3.2018 v 16:13 Kalev Lember napsal(a):
> On 03/02/2018 03:59 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> El vie, 02-03-2018 a las 11:28 +0100, Kalev Lember escribió:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> hughsie just did a new appstream-data compose for F29 and I noticed
>>> there's quite a large number of packages failing in
On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 19:42:48 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> PS:
>
> I wrote:
>
> > Richard Hughes wrote:
> >> 64x64 is a very low bar indeed, compared to all of the other
> >> platforms, e.g. Windows Store or the Apple AppStore.
> >
> > All that's going to happen with such a requirement is th
PS:
I wrote:
> Richard Hughes wrote:
>> 64x64 is a very low bar indeed, compared to all of the other
>> platforms, e.g. Windows Store or the Apple AppStore.
>
> All that's going to happen with such a requirement is that specfiles are
> going to run the icon through scale2x or hq2x if you're luck
On Fri, 02 Mar 2018 16:11:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Richard Hughes wrote:
> > 64x64 is a very low bar indeed, compared to all of the other
> > platforms, e.g. Windows Store or the Apple AppStore.
>
> All that's going to happen with such a requirement is that specfiles are
> going to run
On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 11:28 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/screenshots/f29/failed.html
>
> Would be awesome if maintainers could have a look and see if they can
> make their packages pass!
Hi,
even not a maintainer, why is evolution-rss in the list, plea
On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 8:10 AM, Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/02/2018 02:56 PM, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
> > qdirstat.desktop
> > Failed to load icon: icon was too small 32x32: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/
> 32x32/
> > apps/qdirstat.png, Has no Icon
> >
> > Well, what if upstream doesn't provide bi
On 03/02/2018 03:59 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> El vie, 02-03-2018 a las 11:28 +0100, Kalev Lember escribió:
>> Hi,
>>
>> hughsie just did a new appstream-data compose for F29 and I noticed
>> there's quite a large number of packages failing in the logs:
>>
>> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/s
Richard Hughes wrote:
> 64x64 is a very low bar indeed, compared to all of the other
> platforms, e.g. Windows Store or the Apple AppStore.
All that's going to happen with such a requirement is that specfiles are
going to run the icon through scale2x or hq2x if you're lucky, through a
dumb Image
El vie, 02-03-2018 a las 11:28 +0100, Kalev Lember escribió:
> Hi,
>
> hughsie just did a new appstream-data compose for F29 and I noticed
> there's quite a large number of packages failing in the logs:
>
> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/screenshots/f29/failed.html
>
> Would be awesome if
On 2 March 2018 at 14:10, Kalev Lember wrote:
> I believe the answer is to work with upstream to provide updated icons.
Right, or patch them in the srpm. Working upstream is obviously better
than all the distros having to do the same thing...
> I would personally be a bit more lax with what icon
On 2 March 2018 at 14:44, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
> Also, with what command can I check if my package is now ok?
From memory, I think you can do "appstream-builder
name-of-the-file.rpm" and if it makes it into the example.xml.gz file
then it passed all the checks.
Richard.
__
On vendredi 2 mars 2018 15:10:59 CET Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/02/2018 02:56 PM, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
>
> > qdirstat.desktop
> > Failed to load icon: icon was too small 32x32:
> > /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/
apps/qdirstat.png, Has no Icon
> >
> > Well, what if upstream doesn't provi
On 03/02/2018 02:56 PM, Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
> qdirstat.desktop
> Failed to load icon: icon was too small 32x32: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/
> apps/qdirstat.png, Has no Icon
>
> Well, what if upstream doesn't provide bigger icons?
I believe the answer is to work with upstream to provid
On vendredi 2 mars 2018 11:28:40 CET Kalev Lember wrote:
> Hi,
>
> hughsie just did a new appstream-data compose for F29 and I noticed
> there's quite a large number of packages failing in the logs:
>
> https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/screenshots/f29/failed.html
>
> Would be awesome if main
16 matches
Mail list logo