Hi piegames,
thanks for your reply! On 07.02.21 12:20, piegames wrote: > Hi, > > $XDG_DATA_HOME is for use data storage, and thus read-write. I don't see that in the spec, I just re-checked. What makes you think it's read-write, more than write-once? what part/sentences of the spec are your source on that? > If the > spec doesn't make this clear to you, consider proposing a patch that > makes the wording more explicit. As I said, I'm happy to help improving the text, in general; we'll need common understand and an agreed direction to patch towards though, first. > There is > also `$XDG_STATE_HOME`, a recent addition that has not been released > yet. I found your commit at https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xdg/xdg-specs/-/commit/4f2884e16db35f2962d9b64312917c81be5cb54b now. The text "but that is not important or portable enough to the user that it should be stored in XDG_DATA_HOME" seems misleading to me. Portable is rather abstract and can mean multiple things — e.g. think cross-platform portability versus USB stick portable apps — and XDG_DATA_HOME data may just as well be _less_ important than state in XDG_STATE_HOME, e.g. when XDG_DATA_HOME just contains regular /usr/share like content that is shipped by the upstream application — re-install those files, done, zero value, not important content. Would you disagree? What do you think about dropping the bit about importance and making "portable" more precise, i.e. that two machines should have their own copy or so? What does it take to get a new version of basedir-spec released in general — is that documented somewhere? Best Sebastian _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list xdg@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
