Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On Sunday, July 24, 2011 05:07:19 PM Ben Cooksley wrote: Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, they're insular and only care for themselves. In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). A long term solution, sharing settings isn't even counted, as they are bound to screw us over yet again in some way. They are not to be trusted. Adding the panels apps need to them isn't exactly workable either due to the number of applicable panels and apps. As was proposed earlier, System Settings would call itself System Settings under KDE, but would prefix KDE to the name under all other environments. ie. KDE System Settings under xfce. I have recieved objections that this collides with the branding policy however. Given such an objection, what do those of you who object propose? I mentioned this, but didn't actually object (not sure if you got comments from others on this). I think KDE systemsettings is fine. If you wanted to stick with the official rebrandingspeak, I think (I can't tell) it should be either Plasma Workspace Systemsettings, KDE Plasma Systemsettings, or something like System settings for KDE Frameworks. I've no idea really. A solution must be reached, otherwise it is the users of our applications who will ultimately suffer - and we will probably get blamed for it. For Kubuntu we've taken the position that we will follow KDE upstream on this and that until there is an upstream solution the only reasonable distro level thing to do is patch Gnome systemsettings back to it's old name to avoid user confusion. Scott K
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On Sunday, July 24, 2011 05:52:08 PM Cornelius Schumacher wrote: On Sunday 24 July 2011 Ben Cooksley wrote: Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, they're insular and only care for themselves. I don't want to let a statement like this stand as it is. There are a lot of people in the GNOME community who do want to cooperate. There certainly are also people who don't. That's the same in our community. Not everybody cares about cross-desktop collaboration, and this creates issues, as we have seen. Still, we should treat each other with respect. I understand that it makes you angry, if things break because of decisions outside your control, which you consider to be wrong. But being angry doesn't solve problems, especially not when communication about a common solution is required. There are a lot of technical things we can do to address this specific problem, taking settings from the platform, making configuration available in context, making KDE applications and frameworks more modular and less interdependent. Not everything can be done easily, but we should look for the right solutions and persue them. Additionally we need to talk about how to do integration across desktops. We should not be content with having insular desktops, neither on the GNOME side, nor on our side, nor anywhere else. This only limits us, how we are perceived, and what users think what they can do with KDE software. We aren't the monolithic desktop, which only runs KDE software, and which is required by all KDE applications. That's exactly the misconception we are trying to get rid of. So let's have a constructive conversation with GNOME and others how to share settings, how to integrate applications running on different workspaces independent of the toolkit they are implemented with. The desktop summit provides a great opportunity for that. But again, please act with respect for your own and other communities. Being aggressive doesn't help in finding good solutions for users, and it's really not the atmosphere, I'd like to see in KDE. I haven't seen anything in any mailing list posts that is nearly as aggressive as knowningly reusing a name that was in use like systemsettings. My word for the messages that the Gnome moderators didn't like the tone of is accurate. Scott K
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On Monday 25 July 2011 07.49.17 Scott Kitterman wrote: I haven't seen anything in any mailing list posts that is nearly as aggressive as knowningly reusing a name that was in use like systemsettings. Please don't assume that was an agressive act. I can totally see that someone that goes with the assumption that a piece of software is only usable on one desktop won't have problems if you call a similar piece of software the same on your desktop. In general; please stop assuming ;) (ask politely first) -- Thomas Zander
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
Where's the problem? Have the release tarballs already and irrevocably been forged and fed into some unstoppable mechanism? Per the KDE Release Schedule, we are frozen for everything except build compilation failures, as the KDE 4.7.0 release process is underway. So what is the better option here, violate rules to prevent any users from 'suffering' - or for no meaningful reason (besides 'discipline') strictly adhering to that self-imposed code of conduct and finding ways to cope with the implications that might have? Have you asked 4.7 release manager about it? It would come as a big surprise if anyone would be going to file an official complaint for breaching the freeze for this very valid reason. I really doubt anyone is going to 'suffer'... They will. Will not, because the KDE team will act with common sense, of course. Experience Freedom! The KDE® Community is an international technology team dedicated to creating a free and user-friendly computing experience
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On Sunday, July 24, 2011 16:05:22 Emmanuele Bassi wrote: you're saying that anyone using a KDE application should also install the KDE system settings shell because it is the only way to configure KDE *applications*? Qt, like GTK+ uses the same XSETTINGS protocol, to allow interoperability between toolkits on the same environment -- that's what we use to bridge stuff like the icon theme, the application font name, and other settings shared across desktops. replying only to k-c-d as i hav eno interest in getting involved in the cat fight, but i would like to add some information to this discussion: * what Emmanuele writes above is not fully accurate. i have had to on more than one occassion run the GNOME control panels to get specific features working properly after installing GNOME applications. he describes a perfect or near-perfect world in which we do not yet exist. * Martin Gräßlin is correct that systemsettings is a workspace application; any kcm's that are required by non-workspace apps must be usable via kcmshell4 which is included in the runtime for this purpose. it is not perfect, in terms of giving users of KDE applications a perfect experience in, say a GNOME workspace, but then that's probably why we also recommend the KDE workspaces ;). but NO KDE application outside of the kde-workspace module may reasonably expect that ANY workspace app is installed. period. * if our users complain about the results, we can easily point them to the decison made by the GNOME community and let the fault lay on that decision. it is not our job to police everyone who writes free software, even if their decisions do not fit ours. we can point them to kcmshell4 and shrug our shoulders, noting that in the choice of GNOME3 as a shell, the user has made a decision with several collateral effects. * technical solutions to the underlying problems of needing multiple control panel applications installed simultaneously, not being able to extend the workspace control panels in a workspace-neutral way and not sharing technologies we probably ought to anyways for the sake of our users (the SecretService thing being a god example: when will we finally see that in git? :) are ways to improve the situation over the long term and the things we ought to be spending time and energy on. so regardless of what anyone may feel about the sociability / ethics of recent naming choices, the above are the useful points in terms of being able to make things better for our users. -- Aaron J. Seigo humru othro a kohnu se GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43 KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On 07/24/2011 05:11 PM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: applications using the org.freedesktop.Secrets API will ask for the well-known bus name, and get to talk to the daemon implementing it; that means using the gnome-keyring daemon or kwallet, depending on which is installed. the same mechanism of auto-activation is used for many other things. A bit out of topic, just let me say that this secrets/wallet/keyring thingy is really cool ;) Ciao, -- Andrea Diamantini, adjam GPG Fingerprint: 57DE 8E32 7D1A 0E16 AA52 59D8 84F9 3ECD DBF9 730F rekonq project WEB: http://rekonq.kde.org IRC: rekonq@freenode
Re: Go Daddy root certificates
On Monday, 25. July 2011 02:10:56 Thiago Macieira wrote: On Sunday, 24 de July de 2011 14:51:34 Gary Greene wrote: On Jul 23, 2011, at 10:33 AM, Martin Koller wrote: Hi, can anyone answer the case https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=277319 , please ? Honestly, I really wish that Mozilla/KDE/Google/Wget/insert FOSS group that has their own root certificate store here would get together on fdo and create a common project that the root certificates could be aggregated at instead of each project doing it themselves... The answer is: STOP distributing our own certificates. Rely on Qt's support, which also doesn't distribute certificates. The burden then falls on the system integrator (the distros), which will select a root CA package that they feel confident about. They're also the ones who can roll out security updates directly to the users. We can't. How does the resolution process work here in KDE - I mean: who has the final say that KDE stops (or doesn't stop) to deliver the certificates ? Can I close mentioned bko entry as INVALID or WONTFIX ? -- Best regards/Schöne Grüße Martin A: Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q: Why is top posting bad? () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments Geschenkideen, Accessoires, Seifen, Kulinarisches: www.bibibest.at signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
2011/7/24 Ben Cooksley bcooks...@kde.org: Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, they're insular and only care for themselves. In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). A long term solution, sharing settings isn't even counted, as they are bound to screw us over yet again in some way. They are not to be trusted. Adding the panels apps need to them isn't exactly workable either due to the number of applicable panels and apps. As was proposed earlier, System Settings would call itself System Settings under KDE, but would prefix KDE to the name under all other environments. ie. KDE System Settings under xfce. I have recieved objections that this collides with the branding policy however. Given such an objection, what do those of you who object propose? A solution must be reached, otherwise it is the users of our applications who will ultimately suffer - and we will probably get blamed for it. Regards, Ben Cooksley System Settings Maintainer Hi Ben, Could you read and comment on my proposal: http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131142514605051w=2 I would like to implement this in the spec, KDE en Gnome, but i need some pointers on where i should make such edits and to get it approved. I think that is the most sane solution that doesn't require multiple desktop files. If you agree on this, what do i need to do next? Just some guesses.. - Propose the updated standard in the freedesktop mailing list (which one?) - Make patched for KDE (which component? where? file?) - Make patches for gnome (which component? where? file?) Note: anyone is fine, not just Ben. Aiming at him since he started this mailing. Regards, Mark
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:32 pm, Mark wrote: Hi Ben, Could you read and comment on my proposal: http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131142514605051w=2 I would like to implement this in the spec, KDE en Gnome, but i need some pointers on where i should make such edits and to get it approved. I think that is the most sane solution that doesn't require multiple desktop files. If you agree on this, what do i need to do next? Just some guesses.. - Propose the updated standard in the freedesktop mailing list (which one?) - Make patched for KDE (which component? where? file?) - Make patches for gnome (which component? where? file?) This proposal is fine for technically literate users, and might provide a short term fix, but, as Friedrich has already pointed out, it is not good for a user who just uses whatever desktop happens to be installed on his/her system, and installs whichever applications seem suitable regardless of what desktop they come from. Such users won't necessarily know whether the application they are using is a KDE one or a Gnome one or something else. Faced with two alternative settings applications, say System Settings and KDE System Settings/Gnome System Settings, that user would not realise the relevance of the Gnome/KDE System Settings, and would likely ignore it even if it happened to be the one needed for the application. The only long term solution for ordinary users is to have interoperability of settings between desktops, so that it won't matter which system settings application they use. Applications with more specialist needs, i.e. settings which aren't (yet) interoperable, would need to provide configuration of those settings from within the application. -- David Jarvie. KDE developer. KAlarm author - http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
Il giorno dom, 24/07/2011 alle 22.17 +0200, Aurélien Gâteau ha scritto: Le 24/07/2011 17:11, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit : GTK+ applications use the XSETTINGS keys: http://standards.freedesktop.org/xsettings-spec/xsettings-spec-0.5.html so every key that is shared using that specification is picked up automatically by GTK+ applications. we can definitely talk about extending the set of shared keys: we routinely do that on xdg-list -- for instance when the sound theme spec was introduced. The spec does not provide a list of shared keys, does such a list exist? If there is no such list I don't see how we could share anything. http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/XSettingsRegistry I don't know what is shared right now but it is definitely not enough: a GTK application running on a KDE workspace does not follow KDE keybindings, palette, fonts, icon theme, label alignment or dialog button order. Additionally I don't believe a shared keys system is enough to share a widget theme. Otherwise the Oxygen devs probably wouldn't have created the Oxygen GTK theme. Of course, you would need to create a KDE theme. XSettings is just for choosing which theme among many. Giovanni signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
Thomas Zander zan...@kde.org wrote: On Monday 25 July 2011 07.49.17 Scott Kitterman wrote: I haven't seen anything in any mailing list posts that is nearly as aggressive as knowningly reusing a name that was in use like systemsettings. Please don't assume that was an agressive act. I can totally see that someone that goes with the assumption that a piece of software is only usable on one desktop won't have problems if you call a similar piece of software the same on your desktop. In general; please stop assuming ;) (ask politely first) It was stated up front that Gnome was aware of the naming conflict when they did it and there was zero advance communication, so I don't think I'm assuming anything. Scott K
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
Hi Mark, have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131149560119520w=2 I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Mark mark...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/7/24 Ben Cooksley bcooks...@kde.org: Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, they're insular and only care for themselves. In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). A long term solution, sharing settings isn't even counted, as they are bound to screw us over yet again in some way. They are not to be trusted. Adding the panels apps need to them isn't exactly workable either due to the number of applicable panels and apps. As was proposed earlier, System Settings would call itself System Settings under KDE, but would prefix KDE to the name under all other environments. ie. KDE System Settings under xfce. I have recieved objections that this collides with the branding policy however. Given such an objection, what do those of you who object propose? A solution must be reached, otherwise it is the users of our applications who will ultimately suffer - and we will probably get blamed for it. Regards, Ben Cooksley System Settings Maintainer Hi Ben, Could you read and comment on my proposal: http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131142514605051w=2 I would like to implement this in the spec, KDE en Gnome, but i need some pointers on where i should make such edits and to get it approved. I think that is the most sane solution that doesn't require multiple desktop files. If you agree on this, what do i need to do next? Just some guesses.. - Propose the updated standard in the freedesktop mailing list (which one?) - Make patched for KDE (which component? where? file?) - Make patches for gnome (which component? where? file?) Note: anyone is fine, not just Ben. Aiming at him since he started this mailing. Regards, Mark
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Ambroz Bizjak ambr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Mark, have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131149560119520w=2 I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Mark mark...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/7/24 Ben Cooksley bcooks...@kde.org: Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, they're insular and only care for themselves. In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). A long term solution, sharing settings isn't even counted, as they are bound to screw us over yet again in some way. They are not to be trusted. Adding the panels apps need to them isn't exactly workable either due to the number of applicable panels and apps. As was proposed earlier, System Settings would call itself System Settings under KDE, but would prefix KDE to the name under all other environments. ie. KDE System Settings under xfce. I have recieved objections that this collides with the branding policy however. Given such an objection, what do those of you who object propose? A solution must be reached, otherwise it is the users of our applications who will ultimately suffer - and we will probably get blamed for it. Regards, Ben Cooksley System Settings Maintainer Hi Ben, Could you read and comment on my proposal: http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131142514605051w=2 I would like to implement this in the spec, KDE en Gnome, but i need some pointers on where i should make such edits and to get it approved. I think that is the most sane solution that doesn't require multiple desktop files. If you agree on this, what do i need to do next? Just some guesses.. - Propose the updated standard in the freedesktop mailing list (which one?) - Make patched for KDE (which component? where? file?) - Make patches for gnome (which component? where? file?) Note: anyone is fine, not just Ben. Aiming at him since he started this mailing. Regards, Mark Yes... old mail just getting send now?
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:50 pm, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: Hi Mark, have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131149560119520w=2 I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). This proposal has the same drawbacks as Mark's - it is aimed at knowledgeable users, not the ordinary user who may not be aware of which desktop a particular application is from. See http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131159889604990w=2. -- David Jarvie. KDE developer. KAlarm author - http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm
Re: Review Request: Fix bug : now KDE widges are shown in Qt Designer
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101804/#review5093 --- Ship it! Please commit, I was wondering why my designer only displayed KDialogButtons, but nothing else. - Christoph On June 30, 2011, 12:06 a.m., Artem Serebriyskiy wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101804/ --- (Updated June 30, 2011, 12:06 a.m.) Review request for kdelibs. Summary --- Qt designer requires that subclasses of QDesignerCustomWidgetInterface return non-empty, valid XML in domXML() function. makewidges generated empty string in this function by default. Because of this, kde widges are not shown in qt designer. This patch fix this bug. Diffs - kdewidgets/makekdewidgets.cpp cb53c04 Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101804/diff Testing --- My system. Designer now see plugins generated with makewidges. Other plugins must be changed by their authors. Thanks, Artem
Re: Review Request: Use platform palette and fonts when running on other desktop environments
On July 2, 2011, 9:49 p.m., Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: hmm. but now things are still done twice in a kde session, no? what was wrong with the suggestion to notify qt that it should update stuff? Aurélien Gâteau wrote: createApplicationPalette() is indeed called twice when running on a KDE session, but it is not a regression introduced by this change so I think it is outside of the scope for now. I tried not doing anything in kdisplaySetPalette() and call qt_x11_apply_settings_in_all_apps() from the kcm as Olivier suggested, but that didn't work: the palette change was not propagated to the running application. What worries me right now is that the text area of KWrite does not get updated at runtime. I thought it was due to the widget being custom, but it correctly updates itself without the patch. Aurélien Gâteau wrote: Finally found time to do more testing. It turns out the behavior of KWrite text area is the same with or without the patch so it's not a regression. Therefore, I think the patch should go in. Thomas Lübking wrote: Sh*t - i forgot that I wanted to comment on that: kate keeps own color schemes for the text area, they're completely unrelated to he rest of the system. (since you need to configure syntax highlightning and don't want that to run into a conflict with the system palette de toujours) So yes, that's not a regression for sure, sorry. Dominik Haumann wrote: With regard to kwrite: It uses the system colors as long as they were never changed. Changed once, these system settings are overwritten. Hence, this is very likely a KatePart issue. Aurélien Gâteau wrote: Oh. Thanks Thomas and Dominik, it suddenly makes more sense! If there is no other objection I'd like to merge this patch this week. Anyone against that? Aurélien Gâteau wrote: I just merged the changes in. Unless I spot some obvious regressions, I plan to backport the patch in time for 4.7.1. Could it be that your commit caused the recent kglobalsettingstest failures seen on CDash? http://my.cdash.org/testSummary.php?project=16name=kdeui-kglobalsettingstestdate=2011-07-25 On my machine (kongresszentrum), the kde-devel user runs the unit tests in a Konsole inside the regular user's KDE 4.6 session. - Frank --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101805/#review4333 --- On July 2, 2011, 9:19 p.m., Aurélien Gâteau wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101805/ --- (Updated July 2, 2011, 9:19 p.m.) Review request for kdelibs and Olivier Goffart. Summary --- When a KDE application is running on GNOME it looks odd right now because it does not use the GNOME palette and fonts, contrary to Qt-only applications. Attached patch fixes this by relying on the platform plugin to set the correct palette and fonts if we are not running in a full KDE session. Patch was suggested by Olivier Goffart. Diffs - kdeui/kernel/kglobalsettings.cpp 1a497c7 Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101805/diff Testing --- # On KDE - Run kwrite on KDE = KDE palette and fonts - Change palette and fonts from System Settings = kwrite updates itself correctly # On GNOME - Run kwrite on GNOME = GNOME palette and fonts - Change palette and fonts from GNOME Tweak Tool = palette gets applied, font does not for now Thanks, Aurélien
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
David Jarvie wrote: On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:50 pm, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: Hi Mark, have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131149560119520w=2 I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). This proposal has the same drawbacks as Mark's - it is aimed at knowledgeable users, not the ordinary user who may not be aware of which desktop a particular application is from. See http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131159889604990w=2. So what is *your* proposed solution? As you say, the long term solution is to have setting interoperability. The key words there are long term. We can't do that *now*, before the new KDE release and before the new GNOME release. We need a solution *now* to avoid having two entries with the exact same name in the application list. Mark and Ambroz's solutions have the advantage of not requiring months of collaboration and programming, which would be needed for setting interoperability. -- Nicolas
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On Mon, 25.07.11 17:40, Giovanni Campagna (scampa.giova...@gmail.com) wrote: The spec does not provide a list of shared keys, does such a list exist? If there is no such list I don't see how we could share anything. http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/XSettingsRegistry This isn't really up-to-date as it appears. These are the settings that Gtk currently knows: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/tree/gdk/x11/gdksettings.c#n37 Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings
Hi Mark, I've done some small research on what components would have to be updated for the desktop-specific-names solution. I think that would be: - The Desktop Entry Specification, http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/latest/ - KDE's KDesktopFile, https://projects.kde.org/projects/kde/kdelibs/repository/revisions/master/changes/kdecore/config/kdesktopfile.cpp - Xfce's libxfce4menu, in particular http://git.xfce.org/xfce/libxfce4menu/tree/libxfce4menu/xfce-menu-item.c - Gnome's libgnome-menu, in particular http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/gnome-menus/trunk/libmenu/desktop-entries.c Regards, Ambroz
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 6:50 PM, David Jarvie djar...@kde.org wrote: On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:50 pm, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: Hi Mark, have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131149560119520w=2 I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). This proposal has the same drawbacks as Mark's - it is aimed at knowledgeable users, not the ordinary user who may not be aware of which desktop a particular application is from. See http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-develm=131159889604990w=2. -- David Jarvie. KDE developer. KAlarm author - http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm Do you mind sharing your solution? Thanx.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Ambroz Bizjak ambr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Mark, I've done some small research on what components would have to be updated for the desktop-specific-names solution. I think that would be: - The Desktop Entry Specification, http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/latest/ - KDE's KDesktopFile, https://projects.kde.org/projects/kde/kdelibs/repository/revisions/master/changes/kdecore/config/kdesktopfile.cpp - Xfce's libxfce4menu, in particular http://git.xfce.org/xfce/libxfce4menu/tree/libxfce4menu/xfce-menu-item.c - Gnome's libgnome-menu, in particular http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/gnome-menus/trunk/libmenu/desktop-entries.c Regards, Ambroz Hi, Thanx for the list. I already found the spec and kde file. One thing i can't find though is the part that makes multilanguage stuff for desktop files working.. Those 3 source files all just grab the Name value but where does it do the magic that happens when i set my language to dutch.. then it grabs Name[nl] but where does it do that? Asking that since the properties i proposed should have multi language suppert as well.. And besides that.. I do want to implement it, but i'm getting the feeling there isn't that much support for it thus wasting my time if i implement it since it won't get accepted anyway. (which i rather avoid). It's just a feeling and i hope i'm wrong... Regards, Mark
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On Mon 25 July 2011 06:53:28 Alvaro Soliverez wrote: On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Martin Gräßlin mgraess...@kde.org wrote: On Monday 25 July 2011 15:57:16 Ben Cooksley wrote: Otherwise our users will be the ones who will suffer. I really doubt anyone is going to 'suffer'... This NamingClashCrisis is more They will. As an example, KMyMoney users for instance depend on System Settings to be able to set their locale, and therefore the default currency, date format, etc. In that case KMyMoney has to depend on systemsettings and has to become a workspace application which I think the workspace coordinators will rightfully refuse. If this is a must have configuration for KMyMoney it has to add the KCM to its own configuration options. In comparison you are also able to configure Phonon from within Amarok. Be senseful, please. Any application that depends on locale settings needs a way to set that correctly. I can tell the user to open a terminal, run kcmshell4 somethings, and make the required change. Or, I can tell to open Systemsettings, and adjust locale settings. Or you could embed the locale settings KCM in the KMyMoney settings dialogs. KCMs are nice for a reason, and that reason is integration. So that IMPROVES your user experience, because instead of having to open some OTHER application, you tell them to open the KMyMoney configuration dialogs. r BTW, this is a very common support situation, and personally, I will very deeply hate the person responsible for making it even more difficult to support my users under a different, which we do have, and a lot of them. So, it's not a matter that there is an alternative way to do it. It's the matter that so far, it was very easy to point them to a solution, and now it's not. And existing solution on forums and otherwise, now won't work. And all that just because they chose a name that has been in use for over 4 years by their closest partner. So, as an application developer, you can bikeshed all you want, but at the end of the day, Gnome devs have made my life more difficult. Regards, Alvaro KMyMoney development team -- Ryan Rix -- http://rix.si == OpenSource.com: Where Open Source Happens! = _ \//_ All Hail the Beefy Miracle! /_/ \ \ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name System Settings by GNOME
On 25 July 2011 07:18, Scott Kitterman k...@kitterman.com wrote: Thomas Zander zan...@kde.org wrote: On Monday 25 July 2011 07.49.17 Scott Kitterman wrote: I haven't seen anything in any mailing list posts that is nearly as aggressive as knowningly reusing a name that was in use like systemsettings. Please don't assume that was an agressive act. I can totally see that someone that goes with the assumption that a piece of software is only usable on one desktop won't have problems if you call a similar piece of software the same on your desktop. In general; please stop assuming ;) (ask politely first) It was stated up front that Gnome was aware of the naming conflict when they did it and there was zero advance communication, so I don't think I'm assuming anything. Scott, yes you are assuming. The fact is that Gnome used the same name as KDE for their user-visible configuration app. There is no evidence however that they did so to aggressively and intentionally cause conflict. They probably just thought it was a good name. You seem to have a deep mistrust of Gnome that in the absence of evidence you interpret Gnome's actions as malicious instead of being done in good faith. A similar event happened years ago except that KDE took Gnome's name. Gnome had its System Monitor by 2002, ksysguard was renamed to System Monitor 4.5 years later. Notably, neither app has its OnlyShowIn key set so this is actually the very same problem (except that both apps effectively do the same thing which isn't the case for systemsettings). http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-system-monitor/commit/?id=a2ef5a0d37719f8610045508c33fec6d8dccf06b http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdebase/workspace/ksysguard/gui/ksysguard.desktop?r1=548992r2=589532pathrev=961381 There's no evidence to believe that KDE was trying to cause a conflict then, nor is there any evidence that Gnome is doing that now. Unproven allegations like these encourage the criticized party to get defensive and start attacking back, or just not want to listen. Please look for solutions instead of conspiracies. Jeremy Bicha
