GNOME Core Applications

Hello Guix!

Based on the mail-list thread "https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-

guix/2019-05/msg00124.html", it appears that there is a bug, where some

GNOME Core Applications are actually packaged in guix but have not been

included in guix's "gnome" package.

So I did [guix search "gnome-*"] and cross-checked the results with

guix's gnome package source (https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git

/tree/gnu/packages/gnome.scm?id=v0.16.0-5851-g5f83b5153a#n6422); and

found out that the following gnome core application packages are indeed

packaged in guix, but have not been included in guix's gnome package.

gnome-calendar

gnome-clocks

gnome-common

gnome-desktop

gnome-dictionary

gnome-doc-utils

gnome-icon-theme

gnome-klotski

gnome-maps

gnome-mime-data

gnome-mines

gnome-mpv

gnome-planner

gnome-screenshot

gnome-shell-extensions

gnome-sudoku

gnome-todo

gnome-tweak-tool

gnome-vfs

gnome-video-effects

The following gnome core applications are also already packaged in guix

but requires correct renaming before adding to guix's gnome package?

rhythmbox --> gnome-music

shotwell --> gnome-photos

The following gnome core applications have already been included in

guix's gnome package but requires correct renaming?

epiphany --> gnome-web

envice --> gnome-documents

eog --> gnome-images

file-roller --> gnome-autoar

gedit --> gnome-text

nautilus --> gnome-files

I really hope if the above modifications are made, it will fulfill the

actual description of guix's gnome package (http://guix.gnu.org/package

s/gnome-3.28.2/). ?

Thank you!

Regards,

RG.

On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 02:20:39PM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:

Thank you for doing something about this!

gnome-common and gnome-desktop are libraries, not core applications.

gnome-doc-utils is not a core application.

gnome-mpv is not core.

I don’t quite know, is gnome-vfs the same as gvfs?

This appears to be a codec pack or something (?), not an application.

Parabola GNU/Linux-libre packaging shows that these are not the same

app and should not be renamed.

[florian@pelzflorian ~]$ pacman -Ss shotwell

community/shotwell 2:0.30.4-1

A digital photo organizer designed for the GNOME desktop environment

[florian@pelzflorian ~]$ pacman -Ss gnome-photos

extra/gnome-photos 3.32.0-1 (gnome)

Access, organize, and share your photos on GNOME

[florian@pelzflorian ~]$ pacman -Ss rhythmbox

extra/rhythmbox 3.4.3-1

Music playback and management application

community/ario 1.6-1

A GTK client for MPD inspired by Rhythmbox but much lighter and faster

[florian@pelzflorian ~]$ pacman -Ss gnome-music

extra/gnome-music 1:3.32.1-1 (gnome)

Music player and management application

Well, they have two names and others frequently refer to them by

e.g. Epiphany and not GNOME Web, including Epiphany developers.

Of course, there are more non-packaged applications.

I also remember

who says, for example, that gnome-tweaks is *not* core.

Yes, I agree, that should be the goal.

Regards,

Florian

On 5 May 2019 14:52, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:

No problem :)

Agreed. Are they still relevant to be included?

Agreed.

Agreed.

I don't think so. May be this is the reason why WebDAV files added in gnome-online-accounts not showing up in gnome-files.

Not exactly. Provides apps for web cam etc.

Agreed. So they need to packaged and included separately.

Hmm, but the app shows up as Web in GNOME.

What?? How else to enable/disable plugins/extensions in GNOME?

Florian! The link you provided is awesome.

I strongly request the devs to use that link (https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps/)to fix this bug.On 5 May 2019 15:23, Raghav Gururajan rvgn@disroot.org wrote:

On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 03:23:27PM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:

One example of GNOME Web being called Epiphany by GNOME developers is

the same blog:

You can also type both Epiphany and (your language’s translation of)

Web in the GNOME Activities search bar to find Epiphany. The same

goes for Nautilus. The terminal command is also still epiphany or

nautilus.

I do not know if it is possible to give a package two names; I believe

it is not.

Well… GNOME has repeatedly tried to make simpler alternatives for

installing extensions. I believe the current method is GNOME

Software, but I am not sure.

Regards,

Florian

On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 03:36:51PM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:

There actually also is:

This is less detailed than the link before, but it is more recent. I

do not remember reading a more recent post on GNOME core applications

on Planet GNOME, but I may have forgotten.

Regards,

Florian

On 5 May 2019 16:48, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:

I understand what you are saying. It appears epiphany is the old name (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME_Web).Dev must have used epiphany now a days as a habit.

Also, the previous blog link you sent me, recommends to use generic names.

On 5 May 2019 16:50, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:

Thanks Florian!

I see.

Also, I think it should be okay to include apps mentioned in "incubator" section as well. In Guix, users can roll back to older versions of newer ones are unstable.

On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 03:51:54AM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:

Maybe gnome-web could be the real package’s name and there could be a

package called epiphany that propagates gnome-web, like the gnome

meta-package does? Same for nautilus etc.

Regards,

Florian

On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 03:57:48AM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:

Well, incubator apps have not enough polish. Then again, what back in

2016 was an incubator app maybe works fine now — I see the blog

linking to https://wiki.gnome.org/Design/Appswhich lists Notes as

core now. Dictionary is listed as inactive/retired on the other hand.

Regards,

Florian

Yeah! You could be right.

On Mon, 2019-05-06 at 11:05 +0200, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:

Ah, I see. ?

On Mon, 2019-05-06 at 11:14 +0200, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:

Raghav,

Thanks for taking a look at this. I'm sure there's plenty to be

improved in how we package a large collection of software like

GNOME in an intuitive way.

Raghav Gururajan wrote:

Using ‘correct’ here is a bit strong.

~ λ guix install epiphany

~ λ gnome-web

bash: gnome-web: command not found

~ λ epiphany

# browsin' time

While we don't blindly name packages after the binaries they

provide, of course, a look at the project's own publications

doesn't reduce the confusion. Ironic.

“Web is the web browser for the GNOME desktop and for elementary

OS,

based on the popular WebKit engine. It offers a simple, clean,

beautiful view of the web featuring first-class GNOME and

Pantheon

desktop integration. Its code name is Epiphany.

You may install Web from the software repositories of most

Linux

operating systems, where it is normally packaged as

"epiphany-browser" or "epiphany". ”[0]

The README[1] mainly, but not exclusively, talks about ‘Epiphany’.

Even the two URLs balance each other out. I don't think there's

enough here to justify gross renaming, and in the name of all

that's holy let's avoid another mass renaming incident.

Personally, I think adding ‘GNOME Foo’ to the synopses of all

these packages is sufficient (epiphany does this by coincidence,

calling itself the ‘GNOME web browser’). Eventually, this could

be another use for the separate (G)UI display name field as

suggested in the games thread. :-)

Package names aren't opaque identifiers, but they can be a little

technical IMO.

Kind regards,

T G-R

[0]: https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Web

[1]: https://github.com/GNOME/epiphany

T-G-R!

Thanks for your email. I understand what you mentioned. I came across this link (https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps/),where the dev(s) recommend to use generic names while packaging GNOME Core Apps. :)

I think it is better to use generic names for package names and include other aliases/project-names in the package tagline and/or package description.

May 6, 2019 7:20 PM, "Tobias Geerinckx-Rice" <me@tobias.gr> wrote:

Hello!

Recently, I have been given this link (https://wiki.gnome.org/Design/Apps)which lists all GNOME Core Applications that are to be added to guix's gnome package.

Whether or not to do this, I think the package with the name "gnome" in any distribution should always reflect the vanilla gnome suite released by GNOME Project. Any modification to it, I think, should be packaged under different name like "gnome-minimal" or gnome-extras" etc. This can be a good standard.

My suggestion is,

gnome --> With All Core Apps

gnome-minimal --> Without Any Core Apps (Provides only xorg/wayland, dm, wm, menus, drivers, services etc.)

** INFO: Core Apps can be found at https://wiki.gnome.org/Design/Apps.**

Also, based on the above, I think we also need to create/enable new value "gnome-minimal" for the data type "gnome-desktop-configuration" of the variable "gnome-desktop-service-type". Value "gnome" can still be default though. Power users can change the value to "gnome-minimal".

This can provide good modularity and thus provides choices to users. For example, 1) If a user needs full-blown GNOME, "gnome" can be chosen, 2) If a user needs only minimal GNOME, "gnome-minimal" can be chosen, 3) If a user needs minimal GNOME with select core apps, "gnome-minimal" can be chosen under service and individual needed core apps can be added under system packages.

Also, it would be a good standard to use generic names for packaging as recommended at https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps.Other alias-names/project names can be included in package's description.

Thank you!

Regards,

RG.

May 6, 2019 7:30 PM, "Raghav Gururajan" <rvgn@disroot.org> wrote:

retitle 35586 GNOME Core Applications

Hello Guix Folks!

Any update on this bug please?

Regards,

RG.

Hi Raghav,

not all of the GNOME applications have been packaged. Would you like to

try to package some of the missing applications?

This bug has a lower priority to me than others, so I’m unlikely to work

on this soon.

--

Ricardo

Sure, I will give it a try :)

I see.

Regards,

RG.

severity 35586 serious

When I re-visited this bug thread, I thought it needed summarising, so

that folks who are or will be working on this, will find it easier. ?

**SUMMARY**

*ISSUES:*

When comparing to GNOME's Official Guidelines (https://wiki.gnome.org/D

esign/Apps), the package "gnome" that is used by service "gnome-

desktop-service-type" has the following issues.

1) The package "gnome" does not contain all GNOME Core Applications.

Some are already packaged and some are not.

2) The package names and application (.desktop files etc.) names are

not generic.

*ESSENTIAL TO-DOs:*

1) Change the package and application names of exsisting (already

packaged) GNOME Core Applications, to their generic names; according to

guidelines.

2) Re-compile the "gnome" package to include exsisting GNOME Core

Applications and remove unnecessary apps; according to guidelines.

3) Package missing GNOME Core Applications (using their generic names);

according to guidelines.

4) Re-compile the "gnome" package to include newly packaged GNOME Core

Applications; according to guidelines.

Therefore, final "gnome" package should contain Base Components and ALL

Core Applications.

*ADDITIONAL TO-DOs:*

1) Create new package called "gnome-minimal" and include GNOME Core

Applications ONLY of types "Essential System" and "System Tools";

according to guidelines.

2) Modify the service "gnome-desktop-service-type" in such a way where

package "gnome-minimal" can be used as a value (alternative to the

default value "gnome").

Therefore, final "gnome-minimal" package should contain Base Components

and Core Applications ONLY of types essential system and system tools.

**SUMMARY**

*ISSUES:*

When comparing to GNOME's Official Guidelines (https://wiki.gnome.org/D

esign/Apps), the package "gnome" that is used by service "gnome-

desktop-service-type" has the following issues.

1) The package names that belong to package "gnome" are not all

generic.

2) The package "gnome" does not contain all GNOME Core Applications.

Some are already packaged and some are not.

These causes the package "gnome" not to reflect its own package

description and thus affecting the user experience.

*TO-DOs:*

1) Change the package and application names of exsisting (already

packaged) GNOME Core Applications, to their generic names; according to

guidelines.

2) Re-compile the "gnome" package to include exsisting GNOME Core

Applications and remove unnecessary apps; according to guidelines.

3) Package missing GNOME Core Applications (using their generic names);

according to guidelines.

4) Re-compile the "gnome" package to include newly packaged GNOME Core

Applications; according to guidelines.

Therefore, final "gnome" package should contain all

packages/applications (with their respective names) according to GNOME

Core (https://download.gnome.org/core/).

Hello Guix!

Based on information from [1], [2], [3] and [4]; I have formulated a

chart to keep track of things easily. :-)

CHART: https://calc.disroot.org/2nu6mpf88ynq.html

As a start, I will be working on packaging gnome-contacts, gnome-music

and gnome-weather.

If anyone performed anything from chart, please let me know and I will

update the chart accordingly.

[1] https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git

[2]

[3] https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps/

[4] https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/35586

Regards,

RG.

severity 35586 normal

owner 35586 !

Hello

Please note that GNOME Core applications are now listed at

https://apps.gnome.org/en/in the first section.

Those are the applications that they expect being included into a basic

installation.

Currently (for GNOME 42), those are:

- Calculator (42.0)

- Calendar (42.0)

- Calls (42.0)

- Characters (42.0)

- Cheese (3.38.0)

- Clocks (42.0)

- Connections (42.0)

- Console (42.beta)

- Contacts (42.0)

- Disk Usage Analyzer / Baobab (42.0)

- Disks / Disk Utility (42.0)

- Documents Scanner / Simple Scan (42.1)

- Document Viewer / Evince (42.0)

- Extensions (42.0)

- Files / Nautilus (42.alpha)

- Fonts / Font Viewer (42.0)

- Help / Yelp (41.1)

- Image Viewer / EOG (42.1)

- Logs (3.34.0)

- Maps (42.1)

- Music (42.0)

- Password and Keys / Seahorse (42.0)

- Photos (42.0)

- Settings (42.1)

- Sofware (42.0)

- System Monitor (42.0)

- Text Editor (42.1)

- Tour (42.0)

- Videos / Totem (42.0)

- Weather (42.0)

- Web / Epiphany (42.2)

Roman

Roman Riabenko schreef op wo 25-05-2022 om 09:54 [+0300]:

What's the bug?

Greetings,

Maxime.

? ??, 2022-05-25 ? 13:08 +0200, Maxime Devos ????:

To put this in context: the bug is that not all core GNOME apps are

installed for gnome-desktop-service-type. This was previously

summarized by Raghav Gururajan:

In the previous discussion, the core apps were determined from:

The core apps as listed in Michael Catalanzo's blog post are now all

installed by default, except for Documents (obsolete), Logs, and

Software which were not packaged for guix. The GNOME wiki also lists

some pre-release apps.

Now, there is the official page where core apps are listed:

Per this, the following apps need to be added and were already packaged

for guix:

gnome-music (Music)

seahorse (Passwords and Keys)

The following apps will need to be added when and if they will be

packaged for guix:

Calls

Connections (Then, gnome-boxes should be removed from core.)

Console (Then, gnome-terminal should be removed from core.)

Logs (Is it in scope for guix?)

Software (Can be useful for flatpak since there is no guix backend.)

Text Editor (Then, gedit should be removed from core.)

Tour

Console and Text Editor above are specific to updating to GNOME 42.0.

Text Editor needs GtkSourceView 5.4 or newer which was not added to

guix yet. The latest upstream version of GtkSourceView is 5.4.1.

Console is beta and hasn't got a stable release yet but is used anyway.

So, gnome-music and seahorse should be added now. The rest require

packaging effort and interest.

Roman