https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1188093
--- Comment #26 from Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group) <bugs.mich...@gmx.net> --- > I'll see about poking fpc to update that to be clearer somehow > (suggestions welcome). The current wording likely has been inherited from very old guidelines that only defined a primary goal, i.e. make packagers aware of the desktop-file tools related GUI programs where we wanted to validate and/or add an installed .desktop file as to avoid ending up with a missing menu entry. Openbox is a GUI program, too. One could even call it "application", and that's also its "Type=" in the .desktop file. However, it does more than drawing a single window to run within. Nevertheless, do such .desktop files, which are handled by display managers, follow the Desktop Entry Specification or not? Imagine Openbox installed a .desktop file that would not be recognized by a display manager. That would be even worse than a GUI program missing in "a menu". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
