XDG Default Applications specification proposal
astrothayne at gmail.com
Wed Jul 22 06:16:56 UTC 2020
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 8:02 AM <elektra at markus-raab.org> wrote:
> > * Reading the configuration format should not require linking to specific
> > implementation libraries
> This is "not invented here".
No, what library is used is an implementation detail, and should not
be part of the specification. From what I understand of Elektra, it
seems like elektra could support "mounting" the configuration for the
default terminal using a specific plugin for this purpose, and
applications and frameworks could use Elektra to read this
configuration, but the specification should not stipulate that
Elektra (or any other library) must be used. If the best way to handle
default terminal configuration is using something like Elektra's
global key database, then perhaps there should be a separate XDG spec
for that hierarchy, of which Elektra is an implementation (but not
necessarily the only implementation).
> Does anyone here actually care about the first sentence on the website
> "https://www.freedesktop.org"? It reads: "freedesktop.org hosts the
> development of free and open source software, focused on
> interoperability and shared technology for open-source graphical and
> desktop systems".
Isn't that why we are here? To discuss an interoperable way for
different open source desktop systems to launch applications in the
user's prefered terminal.
I'm not sure how some of the items in your list of "useful
requirements for a FLOSS ecosystem" support your argument for Elektra:
> - availability for popular distros
Many popular distros don't have elektra in the official repos, and
even if they do, it is not included in a normal install of most
> - supports human-read/writeable configuration files
All of the proposals so far have had this
> - several implementations in different languages exist
afaict, libelektra only has one implementation, with thin bindings for
several other languages.
More information about the xdg