Adopting AppData in KDE?

[Todd]

On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Richard Hughes <hughsient at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 5 November 2013 17:12, Todd <toddrjen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > For <project_group/>, I think it would be good to allow arbitrary groups
> > rather than limiting it to only a few recognized groups.
>
> I think restricting it to the desktops specified in the menu-spec makes
> sense.
>
>
It already has non-desktop projects than that (such as "mozilla").  And the
description ("specific upstream umbrella project") doesn't imply that the
"umbrella project" is necessarily tied to a particular desktop
environment.


> > I think it would be good too either have a change log tag or a
> > machine-parseable change log spec that would allow app stores to display
> the
> > change log
>
> Define ChangeLog? You mean what changed between versions?
>
>
Yes, as well as the version number and date, probably.


>  > Regarding mimetypes, I recall there had been some concern over apps
> that get
> > their mimetypes dynamically either at build-time or runtime from other
> apps
> > or libraries.  Might this be a good opportunity to find a solution to
> this?
>
> In this case you can specify the mimetypes in the desktop file.
>
>
Yes, if you know beforehand what mimetypes your application will support.
But this isn't always the case.


>  > It might be good to have an email address for the person or mailing list
> > responsible for the file.
>
> That's what <update_contact> is used for.
>
>
Good to hear.  That should probably be added here:
http://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-AppStream-Metadata.html#sect-AppStream-Metadata-ASXML


> > Screenshots are available, but what about videos?
>
> Already filed: https://github.com/hughsie/appdata-tools/issues/9
>
>
Okay, good.


> > Does the <id/> tag really need to have the .desktop extension?  Can't
> this
> > be specified by the type?  So if it is "desktop" type, it can
> automatically
> > add the .desktop extension.
>
> No, as we'll be supporting other kinds of desktop applications in he
> future, e.g. glick2 bundles and that kind of thing.
>
>
Couldn't you just set another type for those?  Or, if the literal file name
is not present, add a .desktop extension?  Anyway, although it is present
in the example, this should probably be made explicit in the description.


> > For a more extreme question, is there a reason all this information
> cannot
> > just be put into the .desktop file
>
> You can't put multiline descriptions in a desktop file, or have
> multiple screenshots with localized captions, unless you *really*
> start to abuse the specification.
>
>
The specification can be updated, though, right?  Can't new fields and
valuetypes be added for those things?  It is a choice between extending an
existing spec or creating an entirely new one.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20131105/203653db/attachment.htm>