getting rid of vendor prefixes for desktop files

[Callum Lerwick]

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 2:50 PM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com> wrote:

>   * It is important that vendor_id stay constant for the life of a package.
>  This is mostly for the sake of menu-editing (which bases off of .desktop
> file/path names).
> '''
>
> So this is confusing as to whether --vendor is mandatory or optional.  I
> can't think of a reason that we'd want to keep recommending --vendor if both
> you and Rex are in favor of dropping it and we can figure out some way to
> mitigate the customized menu issue.


One thing I don't understand is how you reconcile this with the actually
fairly common occurrence of the upstream vendor changing hands? Say if FooCo
has a piece of software called Fooinator, and FooCo goes out of business or
otherwise lets Fooinator go stale, and a community project forks it and
continues development under the same name. Or maybe FooCo gets bought by
BarCo. Does the filename get stuck as fooco-fooinator.desktop forever? Seems
to me the simple answer is to just drop the seemingly useless notion of
vendor_id. :P

What is the filename getting used for? Why are we keying on it? Something
smells broken here.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080520/d6fc643f/attachment.htm>