* Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030530 20:50]: > > I think making things consistent needs us to write them on our own, > > taking upstream entries as suggestions. In my eyes it is just the same > > as with the directories software is installed into. There are just too > > many ways to do it and we do not serve our users well to let them all in. > > I'll let you learn all the languages of the world so that we can throw > away upstreams fully i18n menu entries...
I'm nor talking about throwing them away in general. I'm talking about a consistent menu. If all your menu shall contain are KDE-programs, you might archieve this by blidly copying upstream items. > > Of course it would be nice to have things on places, where users know > > them, but without an consistent concept overall, there is no use to it. > > (Last time I looked we did not put KDE in /opt, though that might have > > things much easier and I'm sure many people were expecting it there...) > > Its Debian that is being inconsistent... Debian may be inconsistent with other distributions. But within Debian it's a dream of consistency. I have users using fvwm, wmaker, qvwm, icewm and others. And all have exactly the same menu. All can look at the others screen to show each other where to find the program to use. The only thing inconsistent in this regard are KDE-packages, which just have a unbearable menu. But I guess I'm just not in favor of KDEs philosophie. I never found a way to let KDE users look at .ps files other than ininstalling kghostview... > > I think making update-menus able to parse files in dektop menu > > specification will only cause such files beeing included without > > inspection by newbies. > > I do not understand this statement. Why would newbies inspect desktop > entries to begin with... I was talking about DD newbies. > It is Debian that is broken since it does not follow the desktop menu > specification. Both GNOME and KDE follow it and will soon have > integrated menus, only Debian stuff will then be outside of the menu. I'd really be suprised, if those will become so simmilar. Even the update-menus rewrite to parse the new format seems not to aim at having all wms in debian exactly the same menu. > > There a many things, that make proper packaging of software a > > complex matter. Writing this single line to get a menu-item > > should really no problem. And if it was I really doubt the > > person involved was competent enough to look in the .desktop-file > > if it is reasonable... > > Now it becomes obvious you did not look at any .desktop files either... > slashdot is dooming us all. A single Debian Developer _CAN NOT_ write > decent menu entries _period_. See the attached konqueror desktop file, > notice it has translations for 57 languages. If there is a proper wording for a menu-item upstream (Note that the item and its place in menu are two different things), then there is no reason not to use it in the debian package. And then there is also no problem to include all the translations. > Debian people SHOULD NOT be writing the menu entries. And it is trivial > to learn if a DD does want to submit a skeleton one to their upstream. As > I already said above a menu entry written by only one person is of little > value since it will have no or very little i18n support. A menu consisting of only original menu items by upstream has no value either. Having Gnome and KDE chosing a common policy where to place their core pieces and adopting such a layout might be nice. Placing all the other free software on earth where their upstream thinks they suit best, will just give an entire mess. > The current system is limping along and needs to be shot. KDE obeys > menu policy just fine (afaik) fine? not having a debian menu at all but placing some wild items in its own categories shall be fine? It's about as good as not implementing it at all. > PS - Next time try to learn about a system before showing you don't > understand the issues at all. Was this a memo for yourself or are you just trying to insult? MfG, Bernhard R. Link -- Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA.
