No, and if I had time I would consider being offended that you asked
My questions were related to understanding why the obvious solution (adding a DE-based prefix to package and binary names) wouldn't work. What I *do* need someone to explain is :
1. Whether there is a need to have both System Setting programs available side-by-side to the same user in the same DE instance (haven't heard one yet), ie whether there is a need to be able to run KDE System Settings under Gnome and vice versa. It seems unlikely.
2. If the answer to Q1 is "no", then the next question is whether there is a mechanism to allow a program named "<DE> System Settings" to appear as "System Settings" in menus.
If the answer to Q2 is "yes", then I don't understand the debate at all. If the answer to Q2 is "no", ie if KDE users would now have to choose "KDE System Settings" rather than "System Settings" then I understand why there might be a bit of reluctance to make the change.
My questions were related to understanding why the obvious solution (adding a DE-based prefix to package and binary names) wouldn't work. What I *do* need someone to explain is :
1. Whether there is a need to have both System Setting programs available side-by-side to the same user in the same DE instance (haven't heard one yet), ie whether there is a need to be able to run KDE System Settings under Gnome and vice versa. It seems unlikely.
2. If the answer to Q1 is "no", then the next question is whether there is a mechanism to allow a program named "<DE> System Settings" to appear as "System Settings" in menus.
If the answer to Q2 is "yes", then I don't understand the debate at all. If the answer to Q2 is "no", ie if KDE users would now have to choose "KDE System Settings" rather than "System Settings" then I understand why there might be a bit of reluctance to make the change.
Comment