On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 10:09 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 14:21 +0530, Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray
wrote:
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245649
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245826
>
> I have a couple of review requests which may be affected by the
> outcome of this discussion. Specifically whether one should append
> "fedora-" to the names of the *.desktop files or use the
"X-Fedora"
> category in the *.desktop files installed by these packages in
> /usr/share/applications ?
The packaging guidelines seem pretty clear to me. For new packages, if
upstream uses <vendor_id>, leave it intact, otherwise use fedora as
<vendor_id>.
The part that is unclear is that it is not defined anywhere what a
vendor prefix is, really. Upstream just happens to ship desktop files
that are called gnome-foobar.desktop or kde-powertoy.desktop, and we
have to guess that the part up to the first - is the vendor prefix.
But what about things like tetex-xdvi.desktop or virt-manager.desktop ?
Once again, desktop files prove to be the worst possible implementation
of an application registry...