Le mercredi 30 mars 2011, à 22:23 -0500, Ted Gould a écrit :
On Mon, 2011-03-14 at 19:02 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
I'd like to hear what you think; if my understanding of how it works is
correct, but you still want to register Unity (to show different apps in
menus, or to have different
Sorry Vincent, your e-mail got lost in the stack, sorry for the late
reply.
On Mon, 2011-03-14 at 19:02 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Something that wasn't clear to me and that I understood after talking to
Didier and looking at an example .desktop file for Unity is how you're
using this. Which
Hi Ted,
Le samedi 19 février 2011, à 14:18 -0600, Ted Gould a écrit :
On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 10:26 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Just curious: do you have examples of what you want to show/hide in
Unity compared to GNOME? If it's only for autostarted apps,
The use that pushed me to write the
Thank you for mentioning this important issue again.
I think the environment variable can be used in desktop entry spec for
OnlyShowIn/NotShowIn and for determine default applications.
In addition, the proposed desktop actions spec for file managers also
needs a reliable way to determine current
On Saturday, 2011-03-05, Ted Gould wrote:
On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 18:37 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 10:25 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
I haven't seen any objection, just questions to this. Final call?
I have voiced my objection to the general idea of 'desktop switch'
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 10:25 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 10:26 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le vendredi 18 février 2011, à 22:26 -0600, Ted Gould a écrit :
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 08:52 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
We would like to add Unity to the list of values allowed for
On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 18:37 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 10:25 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 10:26 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le vendredi 18 février 2011, à 22:26 -0600, Ted Gould a écrit :
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 08:52 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
We
On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 18:37 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 10:25 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
I haven't seen any objection, just questions to this. Final call?
I have voiced my objection to the general idea of 'desktop switch'
behaviour changes, but that's more of a
On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 10:26 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le vendredi 18 février 2011, à 22:26 -0600, Ted Gould a écrit :
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 08:52 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
We would like to add Unity to the list of values allowed for
OnlyShowIn in the menu spec. While Unity is mostly GNOME
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 10:25 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 10:26 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le vendredi 18 février 2011, à 22:26 -0600, Ted Gould a écrit :
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 08:52 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
We would like to add Unity to the list of values allowed for
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 16:36 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
I don't think that adding another value here is needed.
In this specific case there are ways to get around having Unity in the
list. But, I felt like it would be better to go through this process
(as it takes a while) so that, in the
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Ted Gould t...@gould.cx wrote:
I think longer term, we'd like to do things like have multiple desktop
files for applications that provide major features. Things like
Evolution providing mail and calendar. GNOME Shell's matching doesn't
allow for two desktop
Sorry I am late to the party here and may be off thread. This was
discussed back in 2009 with the proposal at that time being
XDG_CURRENT_DESKTOP.
The shipping versions of LXDE have been using this to control how the
menu processor matches OnlyShowIn and NotShowIn. It also uses
On 02/24/2011 06:10 AM, Pierre Wieser wrote:
Sorry I am late to the party here and may be off thread. This was
discussed back in 2009 with the proposal at that time being
XDG_CURRENT_DESKTOP.
The shipping versions of LXDE have been using this to control how the
menu processor matches
That being said, I think it might be worth a standard environment
variable to get that. There isn't one that I know of today.
I agree.
May I propose XDG_DESKTOP ?
Regards
Pierre
___
xdg mailing list
xdg@lists.freedesktop.org
That being said, I think it might be worth a standard environment
variable to get that. There isn't one that I know of today.
I agree.
May I propose XDG_DESKTOP ?
Regards
Pierre
Sorry I am late to the party here and may be off thread. This was discussed
back in 2009 with the proposal at
On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 01:25 +0100, Pierre Wieser wrote:
I am reading the Desktop Entry spec, and more particularly about
OnlyShowIn and NotShowIn keys. This spec refers to a desktop
environment, and there is a list of recognized desktops.
It is here:
On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 14:56 +0100, Pierre Wieser wrote:
Thanks for the pointer, Chris.
At least, xdg-open will give me a start point for most popular
desktops.
I must admit that I hoped that, as XDG specifies some desktops in
its specs, it would also specify somewhere how to identify
- Original Message -
On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 14:56 +0100, Pierre Wieser wrote:
At least, xdg-open will give me a start point for most popular
desktops.
I think its a wrong direction to head, and xdg-open shows exactly why.
You end up with a mess of
if (gnome)
do foo
else if
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Pierre Wieser pwie...@trychlos.org wrote:
Well, I used to believe that autotools were rather useful at compile
time. What I am searching for here is a runtime check, and I thought
this was the meaning of the Desktop Entry keys OnlyShowIn, NotShowIn ?
I cannot
- Original Message -
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Pierre Wieser pwie...@trychlos.org
wrote:
Well, I used to believe that autotools were rather useful at compile
time. What I am searching for here is a runtime check, and I thought
this was the meaning of the Desktop Entry
Dnia sobota, 19 lutego 2011 o 23:59:21 Pierre Wieser napisał(a):
While talking about Desktop Actions, this remind me that I do not
know how to determine what is the currently running desktop :(
Does anyone could point me to some sort of library/hint or so ?
read xdg-open, for example.
Dnia niedziela, 20 lutego 2011 o 14:56:53 Pierre Wieser napisał(a):
May I suggest to the list that adding a desktop to a XDG spec
(e.g. Registered OnlyShowIn Environments of menu spec) requires
to also specify how to identify this environment ?
I thought it is required already, isn’t it?
- Original Message -
Dnia niedziela, 20 lutego 2011 o 14:56:53 Pierre Wieser napisał(a):
May I suggest to the list that adding a desktop to a XDG spec
(e.g. Registered OnlyShowIn Environments of menu spec) requires
to also specify how to identify this environment ?
I thought
Hi Ted,
Le vendredi 18 février 2011, à 22:26 -0600, Ted Gould a écrit :
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 08:52 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
We would like to add Unity to the list of values allowed for
OnlyShowIn in the menu spec. While Unity is mostly GNOME based there
are cases where we'd like some
On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 10:26 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le vendredi 18 février 2011, à 22:26 -0600, Ted Gould a écrit :
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 08:52 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
We would like to add Unity to the list of values allowed for
OnlyShowIn in the menu spec. While Unity is mostly GNOME
The use that pushed me to write the patch/email was with the Desktop
Actions that we're putting in desktop file for static actions on the
Launcher. Unfortunately, it's still an X- thing but I intend to update
it to the current version of the Desktop Actions spec soon (because of
release
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 08:52 -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
We would like to add Unity to the list of values allowed for
OnlyShowIn in the menu spec. While Unity is mostly GNOME based there
are cases where we'd like some desktop files and menus that GNOME does
not so the distinction is relevant.
Hello,
We would like to add Unity to the list of values allowed for
OnlyShowIn in the menu spec. While Unity is mostly GNOME based there
are cases where we'd like some desktop files and menus that GNOME does
not so the distinction is relevant. Patch attached (it's huge!)
Thanks,
29 matches
Mail list logo
