On 25/11/16 17:09, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
> The role of xdg-open itself is already to open the URL with whatever
> tooling is available, so it sounds like we're making the issue more
> complex than it ought to be.
>
> I think we should reimplement xdg-open in terms of snapctl, and have
> snapd itself doing the hand-over to the local xdg-open tool after some
> basic sanity checking on the URL. That way we're not really asking for
> anything from the local system (no dbus service) while remaining
> completely portable.
>
I think this works, as long a we handle the failure cases ("no
xdg-open") sweetly.
Mark
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 4:51 AM, Mark Shuttleworth <m...@ubuntu.com
> <mailto:m...@ubuntu.com>> wrote:
>
>
> I think the port of snapd to a distro should handle ensuring that
> "browse" works. How it does that is up to the port, as long as the
> behaviour is clear it is easy to implement. We just to be clear what
> expectaction a snap publisher can have. I would say "snap-browse"
> is the
> command to use, and on *Ubuntu* that would be snap-xdg-open.
>
--
Snapcraft mailing list
Snapcraft@lists.snapcraft.io
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snapcraft
