On Wednesday 09 August 2006 00:26, Bastian, Waldo wrote:
Patch looks fine with me. Is there a specific meaning associated with
is KNOWN ?
I don't think so, besides is known. I guess it was done that way
just to
stress it and was copypasted to the desktop entry spec that way, but I
don't think
On Monday 07 August 2006 22:44, Glynn Foster wrote:
With respect, I'm not sure LSB means anything to me as a developer working
on Solaris or some variation of BSD, for example, though I appreciate the
good work you guys are doing.
actually, things have been rejected or at least slowed down in
On lun, 2006-08-07 at 19:35 -0700, Bastian, Waldo wrote:
I would like to declare the Desktop Entry Spec to be 1.0 after
proposing and including changes related to the following issues that
have been brought up on this list:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/2006-April/008012.html
On lun, 2006-08-07 at 19:35 -0700, Bastian, Waldo wrote:
I would like to declare the Desktop Entry Spec to be 1.0 after
proposing and including changes related to the following issues that
have been brought up on this list:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/2006-April/008012.html
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 04:35, Bastian, Waldo wrote:
I will propose patches to the spec for review for these issues over the
course of this week. If there are additional issues that should be
clarified before the 1.0 release, please speak up now. Goal of the 1.0
spec is to reflect existing
What is your intention of the spec after it reaches 1.0? How is it
going to
be blessed anymore than any of the other specs on freedesktop.org?
Is there an intention to bring these to the FSG?
Yes, the intention is to include it in LSB 3.2
or come up with some semi-formal process for requesting
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:xdg-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lubos Lunak
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 8:07 AM
To: xdg@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: Desktop Entry Spec 1.0
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 04:35, Bastian, Waldo wrote:
I will propose patches to the spec for review
Hi,
Bastian, Waldo wrote:
+ versionkey.diff: make the Version key a string since it's really
not an integer. But specify its format.
Can we do with two digits? What about adding something that says that if
present it should be 1.0 for implementations that follow this
specification. So
Hi,
Removing lsb/portland lists from the cc list, given that I'm not currently
subscribed to either of them. Most of these are all open ended questions which I
guess may be discussed at the DTL tech board conf call during the week.
Bastian, Waldo wrote:
I would like to declare the Desktop Entry
Adding back lsb mailing list...
What is your intention of the spec after it reaches 1.0? How is it
going to
be
blessed anymore than any of the other specs on freedesktop.org? Is
there an
intention to bring these to the FSG? or come up with some semi-formal
process
for requesting compatible
Banginwar, Rajesh wrote:
Adding back lsb mailing list...
What is your intention of the spec after it reaches 1.0? How is it
going to
be
blessed anymore than any of the other specs on freedesktop.org? Is
there an
intention to bring these to the FSG? or come up with some semi-formal
11 matches
Mail list logo
