Paul Wise wrote: > On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 4:15 PM, William Pitcock > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Honestly, policy really needs to be updated to use the XDG standards >> menu spec, and every WM at this point really should be using them for >> their menus. >> >> I think the debian-menu system should be seen as legacy, since it has >> been replaced with a standard used and supported by many upstreams and >> many other distros. >> >> However, there's a few places where debian-menu is a better solution >> though. (It can be used to build menus for many WMs which do not support >> XDG, but honestly, do we need all these WMs?) >> >> Another solution would be to make debian-menu build .desktop entries for >> the menu in the main menu namespace and not the 'Debian' namespace; this >> seems like the easiest solution.
> +1 I don't think that the idea of superseding menu lacks support, it lacks people doing the work (and the coding part seems small compared to creating a mapping the categories, preferably in both directions, and come up with a sane policy). Also, this seems to be something to do shortly after a release... Another issue besides categories preventing the "easiest solution" to be a feasible one is what to do with generic names: You would not want to have half a dozen "Text editor" entries in a menu but you would not want Debian to unnecessarily diverge from generic naming schemes or drop generic names that upstreams use, either. Suggestions of the "do we need all the WMs" variety may appear to point out less work-intensive ways but really just cover up that developing a good policy and conversion is the much larger issue than where to put files of which format and start a useless side discussion. Kind regards T. -- Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
