On 03/20/2010 06:14 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Saturday 20 March 2010, David Timms wrote:
>> Hi, I am packaging the application tnef [1], where the reviewer has
>> queried whether I need to provide a desktop file.
>>
>> This is a little different from a normal GUI application desktop file.
>> The application is command line only. I have added a shellscript, and
>> some desktop files that cause nautilus and kde file managers to show
>> .dat files as having a potential open with tnef extract entry.
>>
>> So while I'm including .desktop files, they aren't in the menus. Is this
>> acceptable, packaging wise ?
>
> Sure, if there's nothing to put in menus that would be useful without a
> filename (or other non-static) argument.

From: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files

If a package contains a GUI application, then it needs to also include a
properly installed .desktop file. For the purposes of these guidelines,
a GUI application is defined as any application which draws an X window
and runs from within that window.

Does the tnef application meet that criteria?

~spot
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 09:10 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 03/20/2010 06:14 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > On Saturday 20 March 2010, David Timms wrote:
> >> Hi, I am packaging the application tnef [1], where the reviewer has
> >> queried whether I need to provide a desktop file.
> >>
> >> This is a little different from a normal GUI application desktop file.
> >> The application is command line only. I have added a shellscript, and
> >> some desktop files that cause nautilus and kde file managers to show
> >> .dat files as having a potential open with tnef extract entry.
> >>
> >> So while I'm including .desktop files, they aren't in the menus. Is this
> >> acceptable, packaging wise ?
> >
> > Sure, if there's nothing to put in menus that would be useful without a
> > filename (or other non-static) argument.
>
> From: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files
>
> If a package contains a GUI application, then it needs to also include a
> properly installed .desktop file. For the purposes of these guidelines,
> a GUI application is defined as any application which draws an X window
> and runs from within that window.
>
> Does the tnef application meet that criteria?

That's inverse logic though because he's including a .desktop file in a
case where he doesn't have to. I don't see any justification for saying
one can't ship one if one wants to.

Jon.


--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On 03/22/2010 03:07 PM, Jon Masters wrote:
> That's inverse logic though because he's including a .desktop file in a
> case where he doesn't have to. I don't see any justification for saying
> one can't ship one if one wants to.

Yeah, so I have no problem with a packager including desktop files for
proper nautilus integration in situations where the application would
not otherwise require it.

~spot
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On 23/03/10 06:07, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 09:10 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
...
>> If a package contains a GUI application, then it needs to also include a
>> properly installed .desktop file. For the purposes of these guidelines,
>> a GUI application is defined as any application which draws an X window
>> and runs from within that window.
>>
>> Does the tnef application meet that criteria?
No.

I think we might be looking at the inversion of that item, ie if it
isn't a gui app, is it allowed to have desktop files ?

ie:

> That's inverse logic though because he's including a .desktop file in a
> case where he doesn't have to. I don't see any justification for saying
> one can't ship one if one wants to.

Are there any existing cases like this that we could examine ?

David.
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On 03/22/2010 04:24 PM, David Timms wrote:
> I think we might be looking at the inversion of that item, ie if it
> isn't a gui app, is it allowed to have desktop files ?

I think it is fine for him to do that, especially given that these files
are only being used by the desktop browsers (e.g. nautilus and kde file
managers) and don't add noise to the desktop menus.

~spot
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

On 03/22/2010 05:08 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 03/22/2010 04:24 PM, David Timms wrote:
>> I think we might be looking at the inversion of that item, ie if it
>> isn't a gui app, is it allowed to have desktop files ?
>
> I think it is fine for him to do that, especially given that these files
> are only being used by the desktop browsers (e.g. nautilus and kde file
> managers) and don't add noise to the desktop menus.

And by him, I mean you. Or anyone.

~spot
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging