I don't see other distributions (such as Fedora) having x-d-p-gnome as a dependency of gnome-session.
Shouldn't the user be able to choose to have a minimal setup without the support for it? On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 10:59 AM Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org> wrote: > On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 at 10:32:23 +0100, Pablo Mazzini wrote: > > > Therefore, the desktop session needs to depend on the portal that has > the > > > best integration. > > > > Why does this dependency needs to be specified in the gnome-session > package? > > Wouldn't gnome-core be a better place to specify this? > > gnome-core is a somewhat complete GNOME session with various utilities > included (an image viewer, a calculator, software updates, a terminal...), > while gnome-session is the minimal GNOME session containing only the > necessary infrastructure to log in to a working GNOME interface. > Their scope is rather different. > > x-d-p-gnome is more like behind-the-scenes desktop environment plumbing > than a user-facing application: various applications will not work > correctly without it. It also isn't very large. Having a working portal > backend is becoming similar to having a working D-Bus session bus, > or a working fd.o Notifications interface, or a working X11 or Wayland > display, or a working sound server: something that apps assume, such > that the app can't work correctly without it. > > Let me turn this around: what is your use-case for installing > gnome-session but not x-d-p-gnome, such that logging into a minimal > GNOME session is possible, but applications that require a working portal > backend will not work correctly while logged into that session? > > smcv >
