Send to spec (was: Re: [New] Desktop Preferred Applications Specification)
christoph.wickert at googlemail.com
Mon Jun 8 18:53:11 PDT 2009
Am Dienstag, den 09.06.2009, 01:44 +0100 schrieb Bastien Nocera:
> On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 02:24 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, den 07.06.2009, 16:28 +0100 schrieb Bastien Nocera:
> > > Yes, but we'd still be missing metadata to tell us how to construct the
> > > commands to launch those mailers with attachments.
> > Why not adopt Xfce's approach? Something like:
> > X-XFCE-Commands=
> > X-XFCE-CommandsWithParameter=
> Because that's overloading the desktop spec, and adding more stuff that
> shouldn't be there in the first place.
First you complain about missing stuff and then about stuff that should
not be there? This does not sound logical to me.
> > > > BTW: IMO we also need a "sendto"-spec similar to what Thunar already
> > > > does. Then nautilus-sendto would be obsolete anyway.
> > >
> > > What does Thunar do that would obsolete nautilus-sendto?
> > Why is nautilus-sendto obsolete?
> Would, conditional.
> > I still see it being used in nautilus
> > 2.26.2. If it's obsoleted, what's it's successor?
> You said it would be obsolete.
Sorry, my bad, I did not read closely enough.
> > I only mentioned Thunar as an example, because it's usage of the fdo
> > specs for the "send to" menu IMO is very clean and simple.
> You still haven't explained what Thunar does that nautilus-sendto (or
> nautilus) would benefit from?
If we had something like /usr/share/sendto or /usr/share/xdg/sendto or
whatever, we could use the Thunar approach for better cross desktop
interoperability, e. g. use kdebluetooth instead of gnome-bluetooth if
you really want it.
> > Just drop a
> > desktop file in /usr/share/Thunar/sendto and you are ready to go. I
> > don't know a file manager that offers similar functionality
> You mean like Windows 95's shortcuts so you can right-click on a file
> and send to a floppy or the mail program?
Yes, quiet similar. Just because this was already invented in Windows 95
it does not necessarily mean it's bad. Do you think that a taskbar, a
main menu or icons on the desktop are bad because Windows already had
> > and IMO this
> > should be a standard feature across all desktops - then you don't even
> > need a successor for nautilus-sendto.
> If it's anything like Windows 95, then it's still missing:
> - ability to compress the files (optionally, or forced if sending a
Could be done with a little helper like /usr/libexec/thunar-sendto-email
> - discovery of targets (either Bluetooth OBEX PUSH devices, UPNP shares,
> mail or IM contacts)
I already added that in Fedora. Take a
look /usr/share/Thunar/sendto/thunar-sendto-bluetooth, which calls
bluetooth-sendto. bluetooth-sendto will automatically search for devices
and show them in the device selection dialog. But I don't need to tell
you since it's your program.
Or take the send-to-email handler. In nautilus-sendto you first select
the recipient and then start composing the mail. This has a couple of
* only works with works with a very limited number of email
* nautilus-sendto will depend on them, which is bad from a
* adding new clients requires programing knowledge
* the work flow is different than usual: You don't enter the
address in your mail client but in nautilus-sendto
* You only can send a file to a single recipient. If you want to
send it to several recipients you need to go back to the address
field in the compose email window. Work flow es even more
If you do it like in Thunar, you directly start composing the mail by
entering the recipient and get rid of all the limitations I just
mentioned. What is so bad about it - except that it reminds you of
More information about the xdg