Re: Desktop Entry Specification: Add new ExecArg key

--0000000000002a5b0a061d50a7ba
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Afaik it's not part of the desktop entry but desktop menu spec. And it does
not solve the idea of command execution. If it's just a convention or draft
rather than a standard I probably will not have success in convincing
terminal authors to use it in their desktop entries or to have a command
execution CLI at all.

This is obviously such a useful thing. gnome terminal is already using
X-ExecArg. Why not just go ahead and enhance the standard? The package
itself is the only one that can give guarantees on the CLI similar to the
executable name. No other cross platform way. If we do it, this is the only
way. So the question is: should we have it? I mean are there any cons you
can think of?

Probably popular terms that would benefit are terminator which has a
breaking CLI before 2.1.2 iirc - impossible to interact with. Could be
solved with it. yakuake not having it at all. Dev could be convinced with
it. Some terms even allow to define mode (window/tab) this could be
customized by users by creating user space desktop entries.

Vladimir Kudrya <[email protected]> schrieb am Mo., 15. Juli 2024,
22:35:

> Hi!
>
> On 15/07/2024 17.24, Manuel Schneider wrote:
>
> > Afaik there is no way to identify a desktop entry as a terminal emulator.
> "TerminalEmulator" Category, widely adopted and already being
> successfully used in proposed implementation.
>
>

--0000000000002a5b0a061d50a7ba
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto"><p dir=3D"ltr">Afaik it&#39;s not part of the desktop ent=
ry but desktop menu spec. And it does not solve the idea of command executi=
on. If it&#39;s just a convention or draft rather than a standard I probabl=
y will not have success in convincing terminal authors to use it in their d=
esktop entries or to have a command execution CLI at all.=C2=A0</p><p dir=
=3D"ltr">This is obviously such a useful thing. gnome terminal is already u=
sing X-ExecArg. Why not just go ahead and enhance the standard? The package=
 itself is the only one that can give guarantees on the CLI similar to the =
executable name. No other cross platform way. If we do it, this is the only=
 way. So the question is: should we have it? I mean are there any cons you =
can think of?</p><p dir=3D"ltr">Probably popular terms that would benefit a=
re terminator which has a breaking CLI before 2.1.2 iirc - impossible to in=
teract with. Could be solved with it. yakuake not having it at all. Dev cou=
ld be convinced with it. Some terms even allow to define mode (window/tab) =
this could be customized by users by creating user space desktop entries.=
=C2=A0</p></div>
<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">Vladim=
ir Kudrya &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank" r=
el=3D"noreferrer">[email protected]</a>&gt; schrieb am Mo., 15. Juli 2=
024, 22:35:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px =
0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Hi!<=
br>
<br>
On 15/07/2024 17.24, Manuel Schneider wrote:<br>
<br>
&gt; Afaik there is no way to identify a desktop entry as a terminal emulat=
or.<br>
&quot;TerminalEmulator&quot; Category, widely adopted and already being <br=
>
successfully used in proposed implementation.<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div>

--0000000000002a5b0a061d50a7ba--