> Overriding and hiding in menus is done on the basis of "desktop-file-id", the part of the .desktop name before the dot. If you were to start changing those on a whim, you would break all of the user-specific desktop files in people's .local/share/applications for no purpose. > > A bad idea, particularly when your starting point is only that it "might be useful". Okay, but conversely that is a fine reason for adopting sane desktop file names. We're basing some very important, system-wide (sometimes even global) things on simple names that are not being qualified in any way. The convention right now is to base desktop file names on application names, which means two things: a single application named “mail” is everyone's problem, therefore it's encouraged to use an arcane name like “gletterwriter” in the hope that nobody else will think to use that name. Heck, look at package names in your nearest Debian or RPM system. This does not scale! I totally agree with you about the bother associated with switching. Maybe encourage an X-oldId key as a transition for existing desktop files over the next year? -- Dylan McCall Sorry if this comes through HTML formatted or something. I still don't trust Android's email client.