Adamw: >>>> That leaves terminal / Terminal, and all the system-config-* vs. >>>> control-center components (things like Date & Time are identical between >>>> the two). That seems a larger problem than just the menu entries, >>>> though. There's kind of a demarcation question here; GNOME seems to have >>>> decided various settings should be controlled by the desktop, and Fedora >>>> probably needs to decide where it stands on that, whether all our other >>>> desktop environments agree, and how to deal with overlapping tools for >>>> such settings from all standpoints, not just menu entries. Where we >>>> agree that something should be handed off from s-c-* to desktop control, >>>> we should check on the current status of what the s-c-* app is capable >>>> of and whether the GNOME app can do all the same stuff, and whether the >>>> other desktops make it possible to deal with the same settings, I guess. Vhumpa: >>> I went through config utilities across different environments. In some >>> cases definitely the s-c-* are being relied to for configuration >>> completely, notably in cases of LXDE and Xfce too. Sometimes they >>> overlap with the desktop environment specific utilities, but do the >>> configuring in different scopes - e.g. s-c-keyboard will set the global >>> system layout while xfce4 keyboard settings does it session-wise. Well, >>> I'd say there is no point discussing the future of s-c-* utilities in >>> respect to these environments, they are needed. >>> Gnome(and KDE), perhaps with some exceptions, seem to cover s-c-* >>> options rather well. I think we should consider simply removing the >>> conflicting s-c-* from the menus altogether, thus getting rid of the >>> duplicity. Should the user need to access these particular s-c-* >>> utilities, they will still be present in the system. >>> These are the ones, that are duplicate to the gnome-control-panel tools: >>> system-config-date (Date & Time vs. Date and Time) >>> system-config-printer (Printing vs. Printers) >>> system-config-users (Users and Groups vs. User Accounts) Bnocera: >> I would really rather they weren't installed at all, but that would do >> fine in the meanwhile. Adamw: > Well, I don't see why we shouldn't do both. Don't install 'em by default > for GNOME and KDE spins, *and* make 'em NotShowIn desktops where they're > not really needed, so that if people install them for use in Xfce or > LXDE or whatever, they don't show up in GNOME or KDE. I've toyed with NotShowIn for the 3 utilities above and it looks like it makes them hidden just fine. In case when I put NotShowIn multiple times, e.g. once for GNOME and once for KDE, the setting gets ignored by GNOME (KDE honours it). Although that is not a problem now, as it looks like we want to hide these just in GNOME, as it was suggested that KDE settings do not provide system-wide configuration. Thus - would you guys agree to make the 3 duplicate system-config-* utilities "NotShowIn" in GNOME? And if so, what steps should we take to make this so? -- Vita Humpa Fedora QA -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
