X-Fedora : most packages imported from fedora.us use this in the desktop files
X-Fedora-Extra : a dozen packages switched to it
X-Fedora-Extras : package "logjam" uses it
Which one do we use from now on?
I would assume X-Red-Hat-Extras => X-Fedora-Extra, but it would sound dumb.
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 20:19:22 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
X-Fedora : most packages imported from fedora.us use this in the desktop files
X-Fedora-Extra : a dozen packages switched to it
X-Fedora-Extras : package "logjam" uses it
Which one do we use from now on?
I would assume X-Red-Hat-Extras => X-Fedora-Extra, but it would sound dumb.
Damn typos. Meant to write:
... X-Red-Hat-Extra => X-Fedora-Extra ...
On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 20:31 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 20:19:22 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
X-Fedora : most packages imported from fedora.us use this in the desktop files
X-Fedora-Extra : a dozen packages switched to it
X-Fedora-Extras : package "logjam" uses it
logjam is mine, I must be right!
Seriously though, I don't care. We should pick one and be done with it.
If we don't want to draw any distinction, then "X-Fedora" is fine for everyone, and I think that should be the standard for both Core and Extras. Anyone opposed?
~spot --- Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Sales Engineer || GPG Fingerprint: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 20:31 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 20:19:22 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
X-Fedora : most packages imported from fedora.us use this in the desktop files
X-Fedora-Extra : a dozen packages switched to it
X-Fedora-Extras : package "logjam" uses it
logjam is mine, I must be right!
Seriously though, I don't care. We should pick one and be done with it.
If we don't want to draw any distinction, then "X-Fedora" is fine for everyone, and I think that should be the standard for both Core and Extras. Anyone opposed?
RPMforge uses X-Red-Hat-Base everywhere. Should we be worried ? :) What's the effect of changing the category, what is it used for ?
Or are there any plans to use this in the future ? It may make a difference. If it's a branding kind of thing, we might want to make a macro out of it.
RPMforge uses %{desktop_vendor} already when using desktop-file-utils so people can rebrand packages if they care.
Any opinions about both ?
-- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 04:29:29 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote:
RPMforge uses X-Red-Hat-Base everywhere. Should we be worried ? :) What's the effect of changing the category, what is it used for ?
X-Red-Hat-Base puts a desktop menu entry into the top menu, while X-Red-Hat-Extra marks desktop menu entries which appear in the "More ..." sub-menus. X-Fedora is just a placeholder.
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 04:29:29 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote:
RPMforge uses X-Red-Hat-Base everywhere. Should we be worried ? :) What's the effect of changing the category, what is it used for ?
X-Red-Hat-Base puts a desktop menu entry into the top menu, while X-Red-Hat-Extra marks desktop menu entries which appear in the "More ..." sub-menus. X-Fedora is just a placeholder.
I don't like a meaningless placeholder. Either we anticipate a change in the future and we should define that use (having a single identifier for all packages makes no sense). Or we drop it.
X-Red-Hat-Base and X-Red-Hat-Extra has a meaning, although I'm not sure why it includes 'Red-Hat'. Maybe we need a policy of what is expected in the first level menu, and what in the second. (Or another scheme).
PS I don't have any 'More...' submenus on my FC3 even though some of the desktop-files do use X-Red-Hat-Extra.
-- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 05:45:39 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote:
RPMforge uses X-Red-Hat-Base everywhere. Should we be worried ? :) What's the effect of changing the category, what is it used for ?
X-Red-Hat-Base puts a desktop menu entry into the top menu, while X-Red-Hat-Extra marks desktop menu entries which appear in the "More ..." sub-menus. X-Fedora is just a placeholder.
I don't like a meaningless placeholder.
It's not meaningless. X-Fedora has been used to mark menu entries as coming from Fedora Linux. Whether it is evaluated somewhere is implementation dependent. X-Red-Hat-Extra is not evaluated either, I think. Only X-Red-Hat-Base provides the special function of placing menu entries in the top-level menu.
X-Fedora-Extra or X-Fedora-Extras would mark menu entries as coming from Fedora Extras and would distinguish them from manually installed ones. A desktop menu editor might put such markers to good effect.
Either we anticipate a change in the future and we should define that use (having a single identifier for all packages makes no sense). Or we drop it.
X-Red-Hat-Base and X-Red-Hat-Extra has a meaning, although I'm not sure why it includes 'Red-Hat'. Maybe we need a policy of what is expected in the first level menu, and what in the second. (Or another scheme).
PS I don't have any 'More...' submenus on my FC3 even though some of the desktop-files do use X-Red-Hat-Extra.
FC3 KDE has "Preferences > More Preferences" here, where the categorisation works, too. I think X-Red-Hat-Extra is from older times, such as Red Hat Linux 8.0, where real "Extras" submenus existed.
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 05:45:39 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote:
RPMforge uses X-Red-Hat-Base everywhere. Should we be worried ? :) What's the effect of changing the category, what is it used for ?
X-Red-Hat-Base puts a desktop menu entry into the top menu, while X-Red-Hat-Extra marks desktop menu entries which appear in the "More ..." sub-menus. X-Fedora is just a placeholder.
I don't like a meaningless placeholder.
It's not meaningless. X-Fedora has been used to mark menu entries as coming from Fedora Linux. Whether it is evaluated somewhere is implementation dependent. X-Red-Hat-Extra is not evaluated either, I think. Only X-Red-Hat-Base provides the special function of placing menu entries in the top-level menu.
X-Fedora-Extra or X-Fedora-Extras would mark menu entries as coming from Fedora Extras and would distinguish them from manually installed ones. A desktop menu editor might put such markers to good effect.
I understand that. With meaningless I meant that I don't see good use for users to distinguish a Fedora Extras and a non-Fedora-Extras package. What do you think would people do with this information ? I'd like to implement something that has a direct benefit, which I do not see here.
-- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:28:11 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote:
X-Fedora-Extra or X-Fedora-Extras would mark menu entries as coming from Fedora Extras and would distinguish them from manually installed ones. A desktop menu editor might put such markers to good effect.
I understand that. With meaningless I meant that I don't see good use for users to distinguish a Fedora Extras and a non-Fedora-Extras package. What do you think would people do with this information ? I'd like to implement something that has a direct benefit, which I do not see here.
X-Red-Hat-Extra has no direct benefit either. Still it adds a special category to menu entries, which are not considered the base distribution's preferred/primary applications. Wether it is the default to put all menu entries, which are not categorised as X-Red-Hat-Base, into submenus [if implemented] or if this is done explicitly based on a special X-category, is not the point of discussion IMO. The availability of the extra category allows for such operations, whether implemented today or in the future. As I tried to point out above, in a powerful menu editor, you could say "also put Extras into the top-level menu", or "move all extras into 'More...' submenus" or "move all extras into a separate 'Extras' menu hierarchy" to clean up overloaded menus.
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:28:11 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote:
X-Fedora-Extra or X-Fedora-Extras would mark menu entries as coming from Fedora Extras and would distinguish them from manually installed ones. A desktop menu editor might put such markers to good effect.
I understand that. With meaningless I meant that I don't see good use for users to distinguish a Fedora Extras and a non-Fedora-Extras package. What do you think would people do with this information ? I'd like to implement something that has a direct benefit, which I do not see here.
X-Red-Hat-Extra has no direct benefit either. Still it adds a special category to menu entries, which are not considered the base distribution's preferred/primary applications. Wether it is the default to put all menu entries, which are not categorised as X-Red-Hat-Base, into submenus [if implemented] or if this is done explicitly based on a special X-category, is not the point of discussion IMO. The availability of the extra category allows for such operations, whether implemented today or in the future. As I tried to point out above, in a powerful menu editor, you could say "also put Extras into the top-level menu", or "move all extras into 'More...' submenus" or "move all extras into a separate 'Extras' menu hierarchy" to clean up overloaded menus.
Michael, my point is, if almost everything will be in Extras, what use does it have to tag them the same way ? I'd much rather have something explicit for that purpose, like:
TopLevel SubLevel
Than something that you will use as a default tag but has no practical use other than this. In fact, if there are other uses besides the TopLevel/SubLevel and the real category, I'd much rather have those explicitly defined and named now too :)
Maybe:
Novice Advanced Expert
would be a useful tag to put on applications. Or
Stable Unstable (or Beta)
I don't know. I bet people can come up with other tags that may be useful.
-- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 18:01 +0100, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:28:11 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote:
Michael, my point is, if almost everything will be in Extras, what use does it have to tag them the same way ? I'd much rather have something explicit for that purpose, like:
TopLevel SubLevel
Than something that you will use as a default tag but has no practical use other than this. In fact, if there are other uses besides the TopLevel/SubLevel and the real category, I'd much rather have those explicitly defined and named now too :)
Maybe:
Novice Advanced Expert
would be a useful tag to put on applications. Or
Stable Unstable (or Beta)
This sounds like freedesktop.org discussion. Lobbying for stuff should happen there IMHO.
Paul
Le mardi 08 mars 2005 à 18:01 +0100, Dag Wieers a écrit :
Michael, my point is, if almost everything will be in Extras, what use does it have to tag them the same way ? I'd much rather have something explicit for that purpose, like:
TopLevel SubLevel
Than something that you will use as a default tag but has no practical use other than this. In fact, if there are other uses besides the TopLevel/SubLevel and the real category, I'd much rather have those explicitly defined and named now too :)
I disagree. If you put very explicit stuff like this in each menu entry you spread policy over a large number of packages. That makes it real hard to change it later.
Much better to put informative stuff here and have the centralised menu logic decide what to do with it (and I hope someday each individual system user will be able to decide things like "I want all entries with this tag in a separate menu" or "I want all stuff with this tag to be hidden" etc)
Regards,
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le mardi 08 mars 2005 à 18:01 +0100, Dag Wieers a écrit :
Michael, my point is, if almost everything will be in Extras, what use does it have to tag them the same way ? I'd much rather have something explicit for that purpose, like:
TopLevel SubLevel
Than something that you will use as a default tag but has no practical use other than this. In fact, if there are other uses besides the TopLevel/SubLevel and the real category, I'd much rather have those explicitly defined and named now too :)
I disagree. If you put very explicit stuff like this in each menu entry you spread policy over a large number of packages. That makes it real hard to change it later.
Policy is decided later based on the tags. I don't put policy inside of the packages. But you have to have something to hold on to.
Much better to put informative stuff here and have the centralised menu logic decide what to do with it (and I hope someday each individual system user will be able to decide things like "I want all entries with this tag in a separate menu" or "I want all stuff with this tag to be hidden" etc)
Sure, that's the aim. But you won't be able to do that with a generic X-Fedora-Extra tag that matches 95% of your packages.
You have to have descriptive tags to base a policy on, what else do you have ?
But as Paul said, maybe this discussion belongs to freedesktop.org. The question remains, what is the use of X-Fedora-Extra if all packages are tagged with it.
-- dag wieers, dag@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org