>>> That leaves terminal / Terminal, and all the
>>> control-center components (things like Date & Time are identical between
>>> the two). That seems a larger problem than just the menu entries,
>>> though. There's kind of a demarcation question here; GNOME seems to have
>>> decided various settings should be controlled by the desktop, and Fedora
>>> probably needs to decide where it stands on that, whether all our other
>>> desktop environments agree, and how to deal with overlapping tools for
>>> such settings from all standpoints, not just menu entries. Where we
>>> agree that something should be handed off from s-c-* to desktop control,
>>> we should check on the current status of what the s-c-* app is capable
>>> of and whether the GNOME app can do all the same stuff, and whether the
>>> other desktops make it possible to deal with the same settings, I guess.
>> I went through config utilities across different
environments. In some
>> cases definitely the s-c-* are being relied to for configuration
>> completely, notably in cases of LXDE and Xfce too. Sometimes they
>> overlap with the desktop environment specific utilities, but do the
>> configuring in different scopes - e.g. s-c-keyboard will set the global
>> system layout while xfce4 keyboard settings does it session-wise. Well,
>> I'd say there is no point discussing the future of s-c-* utilities in
>> respect to these environments, they are needed.
>> Gnome(and KDE), perhaps with some exceptions, seem to cover
>> options rather well. I think we should consider simply removing the
>> conflicting s-c-* from the menus altogether, thus getting rid of the
>> duplicity. Should the user need to access these particular s-c-*
>> utilities, they will still be present in the system.
>> These are the ones, that are duplicate to the
>> system-config-date (Date & Time vs. Date and Time)
>> system-config-printer (Printing vs. Printers)
>> system-config-users (Users and Groups vs. User Accounts)
> I would really rather they weren't installed at all, but that
> fine in the meanwhile.
Well, I don't see why we shouldn't do both. Don't install
'em by default
for GNOME and KDE spins, *and* make 'em NotShowIn desktops where they're
not really needed, so that if people install them for use in Xfce or
LXDE or whatever, they don't show up in GNOME or KDE.
I've toyed with NotShowIn for the 3 utilities above and it looks like
it makes them hidden just fine. In case when I put NotShowIn multiple
times, e.g. once for GNOME and once for KDE, the setting gets ignored
by GNOME (KDE honours it). Although that is not a problem now, as it
looks like we want to hide these just in GNOME, as it was suggested
that KDE settings do not provide system-wide configuration.
Thus - would you guys agree to make the 3 duplicate system-config-*
utilities "NotShowIn" in GNOME? And if so, what steps should we take to
make this so?