app id in desktop file

Shaun McCance shaunm at
Sun May 8 16:19:57 PDT 2011

On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 00:40 +0200, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> hi Dylan,
> Thanks for your remarks.
> On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 07:13 -0700, Dylan McCall wrote:
> >  We're basing some very important, system-wide (sometimes even global)
> > things on simple names that are not being qualified in any way.
> This is a pretty important point and not really a strictly philosophical
> debate either.  We have some situations like epiphany where multiple
> packages have the same name and we need to do some tricks (like renaming
> to epiphany-browser) to dodge issues.

I like the idea of all IDs being namespaced. It's cleaner and avoids
conflicts (like Epiphany). But right now, we mostly base IDs off of
binary names. On Unix-like systems, /usr/bin is already the ultimate
naming authority. If you have conflicts there, nothing else really

The thought of typing rDNS-style commands in the shell makes me

It would be interesting to look at a list of everything that gives
us some sort of names for things, and how well those things line
up with each other: distro package names, desktop file names,
pkg-config names, D-Bus bus names, settings schema IDs, help
URIs, binary names, datadirs, etc.


More information about the xdg mailing list