Re: [evolution-patches] String freeze-breaking patch: Make evo desktop file HIG 2.0-compliant

[Rodney Dawes <dobey novell com>]

M�ie , 2004-08-29 at 17:46 +0200, Christian Neumair ka shkruar:
> Am Sonntag, den 29.08.2004, 07:45 -0400 schrieb Rodney Dawes:
> > As JP stated, we prefer to use "Evolution" simply. As for the HIG,
> > that's a pretty sad argument, since the only applications in my menu
> > which seem to actually honor that, are the ones that would generally
> > contain "Gnome" before them.
> 
> gnumeric, abiword, planner, mergeant, epiphany, galeon, rhythmbox,
> muine, sound-juicer, totem, aislerot, freecell, gthumb, ggv, inkscape -
> just to enum some of them, they all use the pattern "<appname>
> <descriptive info>".

Abiword does not. It says "Word Processor" and that is all. Epiphany
only says "Web Browser" for me. Most of these things are not in the
desktop release, either. From what I gather based on the discussions
earlier about this, on d-d-l, the GUP people want apps in the desktop
release to not have the branded name in menu items at all anyway. What
other non-desktop apps do, is not pertinent.

> > The term "Groupware" causes more confusion than help, so I'd rather we
> > leave it out.
> 
> It gives users at least a clue what it is all about, at least it does
> for me - although I must admit, that it isn't 100% fitting, I can't come
> up with anything better.
> Do you lose anything by adding it?

Marketing doesn't want it there. Usability doesn't want it there. I
don't want it there. It's not going there. :) It is a post-2.0 problem,
and we will deal with it for 2.2.

> > After 2.0, we will split up the menu items a little more, and will
> > have different entries for each component.
> 
> That's not the point. We're talking about the monolithic component
> shell, not about post-2.0/2.8 stuff.

No. We are talking about an "Applications" menu entry. I am telling you
that it is a problem for after 2.0. 

> > This patch should not go into 2.0.
> 
> Isn't a little bit of adaption to the rest of the desktop adequate when
> an application is included in the desktop release?

We have done a more than adequate adaptation of desktop release
procedures to get 2.0 into the desktop. Not everything in 2.8 is perfect
as-is, either. The menu entries for the applications menu is a post-2.0
problem.

Please don't respond to this thread any further. The menu entries thing
has been hashed out many times, and we made a decision for 2.0.

-- dobey