Re: Desktop Entry Specification: Add new ExecArg key
Manuel Schneider <[email protected]> Tue, 16 Jul 2024 09:53:35 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.xdg.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--Apple-Mail=_F2F9C695-FC5E-4FB1-B448-3580E7EFF168 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I am not arguing against it either. I just want it to happen. Preferably = soon. My personal motivation is my app Albert launcher. Currently I need the = fragile heuristics mentioned before and an in app configuration of the = user terminal to be used for several actions. This is terribly time = consuming and impossible to get right. If we had the ExecArg I could at = least guarantee the functionality of this feature and delegate = responsibility to desktop entry authors in case of failures. Ofc I'd prefer your proposal to be merged, because then I could even = delegate the choice of the terminal to the system. But compared to this = "convenience" I'd be happy to have it "working at all". But given the = fact that your proposal lingers around for 5 years I thought we could = probably speed it up by going step by step. IIUC your proposal is a = dedicated standard which relies on changes to the desktop entry spec. = Having this single key added to the desktop spec in near future seems to = be more realistic. It is a requirement for your proposal anyway, so we = are in the same boat, aren't we? Since I am not familiar with the XDG realm I struggle to find out where = to start a discussion to get things off the ground. You sent your PR = long time ago. Has there been a discussion or such anywhere? > Am 16.07.2024 um 09:25 schrieb Vladimir Kudrya = <[email protected]>: >=20 > On 16/07/2024 01.21, Manuel Schneider wrote: >=20 >> 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. >>=20 > I'm not arguing against [X-]ExecArg, I proposed it :) >=20 > It just has another function: specifying exec arg in case it is not = '-e' or is not used. Identifying entry as a terminal happens via = category, and it is already a part of the proposed spec. >=20 --Apple-Mail=_F2F9C695-FC5E-4FB1-B448-3580E7EFF168 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii <html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Dus-ascii"></head><body style=3D"overflow-wrap: break-word; = -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">I am not = arguing against it either. I just want it to happen. Preferably = soon.<div><br></div><div>My personal motivation is my app Albert = launcher. Currently I need the fragile heuristics mentioned before and = an in app configuration of the user terminal to be used for several = actions. This is terribly time consuming and impossible to get right. If = we had the ExecArg I could at least guarantee the functionality of this = feature and delegate responsibility to desktop entry authors in case of = failures.</div><div><br></div><div>Ofc I'd prefer your proposal to be = merged, because then I could even delegate the choice of the terminal to = the system. But compared to this "convenience" I'd be happy to have it = "working at all". <span style=3D"caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: = rgb(0, 0, 0);">But given the fact that your proposal lingers around for = 5 years I thought we could probably speed it up by going step by step. = IIUC your proposal is a dedicated standard which relies on changes to = the desktop entry spec. Having this single key added to the desktop spec = in near future seems to be more realistic. It is a requirement for your = proposal anyway, so we are in the same boat, aren't = we?</span></div><div><span style=3D"caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: = rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br></span></div><div><font color=3D"#000000">Since I am = not familiar with the XDG realm I struggle to find out where to start a = discussion to get things off the ground. You sent your PR long time = ago. Has there been a discussion or such = anywhere?</font></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><b= r></div><div><div><br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div>Am 16.07.2024 um = 09:25 schrieb Vladimir Kudrya <[email protected]>:</div><br = class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div>On 16/07/2024 01.21, = Manuel Schneider wrote:<br><br><blockquote type=3D"cite">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.<br><br></blockquote>I'm not arguing against = [X-]ExecArg, I proposed it :)<br><br>It just has another function: = specifying exec arg in case it is not '-e' or is not used. Identifying = entry as a terminal happens via category, and it is already a part of = the proposed = spec.<br><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>= --Apple-Mail=_F2F9C695-FC5E-4FB1-B448-3580E7EFF168--