On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 10:31:31PM +0200, Linas Zvirblis wrote: > Bill Allombert wrote: > > >This is icons and translations. Both are going to be handled specially > >and I won't be able to accept their addition until the special way is > >implemented. I won't repeat the detail in this thread, but feel free > >to ask for them if you cannot find them in the archive. > > Does it mean that this is being worked on? I have found quite a bit of > posts regarding this issue, but most date back a couple of years. > Unfortunately, I do not know what exactly should I be looking for.
It is not really worked on. The icon thread is at: <http://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2003/05/msg00051.html> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2003/06/msg00017.html> The translation thread is at: <http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/12/msg00613.html> I will accept other solutions provide they are manageable in practice. > >I don't know. Properly they are "terminal emulators". > > Yes, that probably is the most correct term, but not the most > appropriate one in this case. If it was Applications > Terminal > Emulators, that would be fine. But this is a top level entry, so when I > select it, I expect an emulated terminal. Not some specific application, > but simply a command line prompt. Hence "Terminals". Maybe 'Graphical terminals' ? > On the other hand, this might mean that it should not be a top level > section. Maybe moving them to Applications is actually a good idea? We > could then have a single top level entry called "Terminal" that would > execute x-terminal-emulator. Well I see the Terminal entry as a window-manager specific configuration, so it does not belong in Debian menu. > >I would take the opportunuity to rename the Screen hierarchy something > >sane ("lock" and "save" meanings are not obvious). > > How about "Lockers"[1] and "Savers"[2]? Everybody knows what a term > "screensaver" refers to. Locker could mean a drawer or a cupboard for > native English speakers, though. Or maybe not. > > [1] Screen/Lockers > [2] Screen/Savers It is clearer than Lock and Save. > >I don't know. The root window background is almost the only thing that > >can be customisedindepdendently of the wm/desktop. > > Apart from xsetroot (that I bet nobody uses), these use "Root-window": > > * xphoon - sets the root window to a picture of the moon > * xplanet - render images of the earth > * chbg - tool for changing the desktop background image in X11 > * root-portal - Monitors the system and displays the results on the desktop > * chameleon - Application for putting pictures or color in the root window > * wallp - GTK+ and Imlib based app for periodically updating root of X > > The question is, do they really deserve a separate section? (8 entries > in total) The ability to draw to root window does not indicate the > purpose of an application. Many can do that. Many do. Most are in > different sections. There a bit related to bug #162849. They are application that do not open windows. Root-window should be reserved to menu entries (not programs) which sole purpose is to modify the Root-window. But it is not clear there are enough of them to warrant a subsection. > >I think they should go in a separate section, but I find hard to find > >the Modules subsection (on my laptop) because it is drowned under 45 > >window-managers entries. There are others wm-specific menu entries that > >often end up in the Window Managers sections and suffer the same > >problem. > > Maybe allow WM specific top level entries? Something like > "Configuration" in Fluxbox root menu. These could be named after WM that > uses them (for example "FVWM"), or simply "Modules". A person running a > WM that uses modules can be expected to know what they are. In fact, they are already allowed. However this should not prevent us to improve the recommandation. > >>I was wondering if it is fine to make "Apps/System/Language-Environment" > >>official? It is used only by language-env, but creates 19 entries and > >>seems to be quite popular according to popcon. > > > >Maybe it is better to reserve it to language-env. But of course it > >should still be translated. > > Included this in draft: > > System/Language Environment [was:Language-Environment] > This section is reserved to language-env as a special case. > > By the way, I posted "Games" draft to pkg-games-devel, as I find it hard > to work on. From all the changes I made, I am only certain about > renaming "Tetris-like" to "Blocks". "Tetris" is a trademark and should > not be used. > > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-games-devel/2006-February/000292.html I think games should be classified by the kind of interaction between the computer(s) and the player(s). Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
