On 18 Aug 2008, at 03:25, Jedy Wang wrote: > On Sat, 2008-08-16 at 12:03 -0500, Brian Cameron wrote: >> I don't understand the value in not having devhelp in the default >> menus. I think we should add this to our UI spec rather than >> removing it from the menu. >> >> I don't feel strongly about whether ghex should be removed or not. >> I think if we remove it, we should remove it from both Nevada and >> OpenSolaris, not just OpenSolaris. > Devhelp is not removed. It's hidden. I am not sure why but according > to > our UI spec, Developer Tools menu entry and all its children are > hidden.
Ok, so we're running into some Nevada v. OpenSolaris spec issues again here, I think :/ The Developer Tools menu item, and all its children, are only "hidden" in 2008.11 because none of the applications on the menu are included on the LiveCD (as noted directly under the "Applications Menu"). Or at least, they weren't in 2008.05. However, the spec also shows where we expect those items (and some others) to appear, if the user were to download those applications from pkg.opensolaris.org. I now realise this was a bad idea, and I understand why it's confusing the effort to implement the 2008.11 spec. So, first thing in the morning, I'll strip out all those confusing entries (perhaps moving them to a separate section) to make things clearer. To summarise: Jedy, to implement the 2008.11 spec, you shouldn't have to modify the .desktop files of any applications that are not included on the LiveCD. (Unfortunately, of course, the contents of the 2008.11 LiveCD haven't been finalised yet, so this is a slightly moving target.) Thanks, Calum. -- CALUM BENSON, Usability Engineer Sun Microsystems Ireland mailto:calum.benson at sun.com GNOME Desktop Team http://blogs.sun.com/calum +353 1 819 9771 Any opinions are personal and not necessarily those of Sun Microsystems
