GNOME Core Applications

OpenSubmitted by Raghav Gururajan.
Details
6 participants
  • Ludovic Courtès
  • Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
  • pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
  • Raghav Gururajan
  • Ricardo Wurmus
  • Raghav Gururajan
Owner
Somebody
Severity
normal
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 5 May 2019 20:20
GNOME
(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
c99df64bf65aed4210c059cc2ff5628129be9abc.camel@disroot.org
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 someGNOME Core Applications are actually packaged in guix but have not beenincluded in guix's "gnome" package.
So I did [guix search "gnome-*"] and cross-checked the results withguix's gnome package source (https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/gnu/packages/gnome.scm?id=v0.16.0-5851-g5f83b5153a#n6422); andfound out that the following gnome core application packages are indeedpackaged in guix, but have not been included in guix's gnome package.
gnome-calendargnome-clocksgnome-commongnome-desktopgnome-dictionarygnome-doc-utilsgnome-icon-themegnome-klotskignome-mapsgnome-mime-datagnome-minesgnome-mpvgnome-plannergnome-screenshotgnome-shell-extensionsgnome-sudokugnome-todognome-tweak-toolgnome-vfsgnome-video-effects
The following gnome core applications are also already packaged in guixbut requires correct renaming before adding to guix's gnome package?
rhythmbox --> gnome-musicshotwell --> gnome-photos
The following gnome core applications have already been included inguix's gnome package but requires correct renaming?
epiphany --> gnome-webenvice --> gnome-documentseog --> gnome-imagesfile-roller --> gnome-autoargedit --> gnome-textnautilus --> gnome-files
I really hope if the above modifications are made, it will fulfill theactual description of guix's gnome package (http://guix.gnu.org/packages/gnome-3.28.2/). ☺
Thank you!
Regards,RG.
P
P
pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote on 5 May 2019 20:52
(name . Raghav Gururajan)(address . rvgn@disroot.org)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190505185230.bofz6ewln5gs7vde@pelzflorian.localdomain
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 02:20:39PM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:
Toggle quote (8 lines)> 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.>
Thank you for doing something about this!

Toggle quote (8 lines)> 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-common and gnome-desktop are libraries, not core applications.
Toggle quote (3 lines)> gnome-dictionary> gnome-doc-utils
gnome-doc-utils is not a core application.
Toggle quote (7 lines)> gnome-icon-theme> gnome-klotski> gnome-maps> gnome-mime-data> gnome-mines> gnome-mpv
gnome-mpv is not core.
Toggle quote (8 lines)> gnome-planner> gnome-screenshot> gnome-shell-extensions> gnome-sudoku> gnome-todo> gnome-tweak-tool> gnome-vfs
I don’t quite know, is gnome-vfs the same as gvfs?
Toggle quote (3 lines)> gnome-video-effects>
This appears to be a codec pack or something (?), not an application.

Toggle quote (7 lines)> 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>
Parabola GNU/Linux-libre packaging shows that these are not the sameapp and should not be renamed.
[florian@pelzflorian ~]$ pacman -Ss shotwellcommunity/shotwell 2:0.30.4-1 A digital photo organizer designed for the GNOME desktop environment[florian@pelzflorian ~]$ pacman -Ss gnome-photosextra/gnome-photos 3.32.0-1 (gnome) Access, organize, and share your photos on GNOME[florian@pelzflorian ~]$ pacman -Ss rhythmboxextra/rhythmbox 3.4.3-1 Music playback and management applicationcommunity/ario 1.6-1 A GTK client for MPD inspired by Rhythmbox but much lighter and faster[florian@pelzflorian ~]$ pacman -Ss gnome-musicextra/gnome-music 1:3.32.1-1 (gnome) Music player and management application

Toggle quote (11 lines)> 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>
Well, they have two names and others frequently refer to them bye.g. Epiphany and not GNOME Web, including Epiphany developers.

Of course, there are more non-packaged applications.
I also rememberhttps://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps/who says, for example, that gnome-tweaks is *not* core.
Toggle quote (5 lines)> 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/). ☺>
Yes, I agree, that should be the goal.
Regards,Florian
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 5 May 2019 21:23
(name . pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))(address . pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190505192330.6E5F430863@disroot.org
On 5 May 2019 14:52, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:
Toggle quote (13 lines)>> On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 02:20:39PM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote: > > 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. > > >
> Thank you for doing something about this!
No problem :)
Toggle quote (13 lines)>>> > 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-common and gnome-desktop are libraries, not core applications.
Agreed. Are they still relevant to be included?
Toggle quote (7 lines)>> > gnome-dictionary > > gnome-doc-utils >
> gnome-doc-utils is not a core application.
Agreed.
Toggle quote (11 lines)>> > gnome-icon-theme > > gnome-klotski > > gnome-maps > > gnome-mime-data > > gnome-mines > > gnome-mpv >
> gnome-mpv is not core.
Agreed.
Toggle quote (12 lines)>> > gnome-planner > > gnome-screenshot > > gnome-shell-extensions > > gnome-sudoku > > gnome-todo > > gnome-tweak-tool > > gnome-vfs >
> I don’t quite know, is gnome-vfs the same as gvfs?
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.
Toggle quote (7 lines)>> > gnome-video-effects > > >
> This appears to be a codec pack or something (?), not an application.
Not exactly. Provides apps for web cam etc.
Toggle quote (30 lines)>>> > 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 > > >
> 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 >>
Agreed. So they need to packaged and included separately.
Toggle quote (17 lines)> > 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 > >
>> Well, they have two names and others frequently refer to them by > e.g. Epiphany and not GNOME Web, including Epiphany developers. >>
Hmm, but the app shows up as Web in GNOME.
Toggle quote (7 lines)> Of course, there are more non-packaged applications. >> I also remember > https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps/ > who says, for example, that gnome-tweaks is *not* core. >
What?? How else to enable/disable plugins/extensions in GNOME?
Toggle quote (9 lines)> > 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/). ☺ > > >> Yes, I agree, that should be the goal. >> Regards, > Florian
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 5 May 2019 21:36
(name . pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))(address . pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190505193653.9B62A30856@disroot.org
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:
Toggle quote (147 lines)>>> On 5 May 2019 14:52, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:> >> > On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 02:20:39PM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote: > > > 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. > > > > >>> > Thank you for doing something about this!>> No problem :)>> >> >> > > 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-common and gnome-desktop are libraries, not core applications.>> Agreed. Are they still relevant to be included?>> >> > > gnome-dictionary > > > gnome-doc-utils > >>> > gnome-doc-utils is not a core application.>> Agreed.>> >> > > gnome-icon-theme > > > gnome-klotski > > > gnome-maps > > > gnome-mime-data > > > gnome-mines > > > gnome-mpv > >>> > gnome-mpv is not core.>> Agreed.>> >> > > gnome-planner > > > gnome-screenshot > > > gnome-shell-extensions > > > gnome-sudoku > > > gnome-todo > > > gnome-tweak-tool > > > gnome-vfs > >>> > I don’t quite know, is gnome-vfs the same as gvfs?>> 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.>> >> > > gnome-video-effects > > > > >>> > This appears to be a codec pack or something (?), not an application.>> Not exactly. Provides apps for web cam etc.>> >> >> > > 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 > > > > >>> > 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 > >> >>> Agreed. So they need to packaged and included separately.>> > > 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 > > >>> >> > Well, they have two names and others frequently refer to them by > > e.g. Epiphany and not GNOME Web, including Epiphany developers. > >> >>> Hmm, but the app shows up as Web in GNOME.>> > Of course, there are more non-packaged applications. > >> > I also remember > > https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps/ > > who says, for example, that gnome-tweaks is *not* core. > >>> What?? How else to enable/disable plugins/extensions in GNOME?>> > > 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/). ☺ > > > > >> > Yes, I agree, that should be the goal. > >> > Regards, > > Florian
P
P
pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote on 5 May 2019 22:48
(name . Raghav Gururajan)(address . rvgn@disroot.org)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190505204813.vog2hub3z5mhlcd7@pelzflorian.localdomain
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 03:23:27PM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:
Toggle quote (9 lines)> On 5 May 2019 14:52, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:> > Well, they have two names and others frequently refer to them by > > e.g. Epiphany and not GNOME Web, including Epiphany developers. > >> >> > Hmm, but the app shows up as Web in GNOME.>
One example of GNOME Web being called Epiphany by GNOME developers isthe same blog:
https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2019/03/19/epiphany-technology-preview-upgrade-requires-manual-intervention/
You can also type both Epiphany and (your language’s translation of)Web in the GNOME Activities search bar to find Epiphany. The samegoes for Nautilus. The terminal command is also still epiphany ornautilus.
I do not know if it is possible to give a package two names; I believeit is not.


Toggle quote (10 lines)> > Of course, there are more non-packaged applications. > >> > I also remember > > https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps/ > > who says, for example, that gnome-tweaks is *not* core. > >> > What?? How else to enable/disable plugins/extensions in GNOME?>
Well… GNOME has repeatedly tried to make simpler alternatives forinstalling extensions. I believe the current method is GNOMESoftware, but I am not sure.
Regards,Florian
P
P
pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote on 5 May 2019 22:50
(name . Raghav Gururajan)(address . rvgn@disroot.org)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190505205014.rlasyz64r44viqyh@pelzflorian.localdomain
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 03:36:51PM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:
Toggle quote (4 lines)> 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.
There actually also is:https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2017/08/13/gnome-3-26-core-applications/
This is less detailed than the link before, but it is more recent. Ido not remember reading a more recent post on GNOME core applicationson Planet GNOME, but I may have forgotten.
Regards,Florian
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 6 May 2019 09:51
(name . pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))(address . pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190506075159.12C59308D7@disroot.org
On 5 May 2019 16:48, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:
Toggle quote (25 lines)>> On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 03:23:27PM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote: > > On 5 May 2019 14:52, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote: > > > Well, they have two names and others frequently refer to them by > > > e.g. Epiphany and not GNOME Web, including Epiphany developers. > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, but the app shows up as Web in GNOME. > > >
> One example of GNOME Web being called Epiphany by GNOME developers is > the same blog: >> https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2019/03/19/epiphany-technology-preview-upgrade-requires-manual-intervention/ >> 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.
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.
Toggle quote (19 lines)>>>> > > Of course, there are more non-packaged applications. > > > > > > I also remember > > > https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps/ > > > who says, for example, that gnome-tweaks is *not* core. > > > > > > > What?? How else to enable/disable plugins/extensions in GNOME? > > >> 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
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 6 May 2019 09:57
(name . pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))(address . pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190506075752.95172308D9@disroot.org
On 5 May 2019 16:50, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:
Toggle quote (13 lines)>> On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 03:36:51PM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote: > > 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. >> There actually also is: > https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2017/08/13/gnome-3-26-core-applications/ >> 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.
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.
Toggle quote (3 lines)>> Regards, > Florian
P
P
pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote on 6 May 2019 11:05
(name . Raghav Gururajan)(address . rvgn@disroot.org)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190506090534.c3xzmapsdrqtc7ww@pelzflorian.localdomain
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 03:51:54AM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:
Toggle quote (14 lines)> On 5 May 2019 16:48, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de> wrote:> > 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. > > 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.>
Maybe gnome-web could be the real package’s name and there could be apackage called epiphany that propagates gnome-web, like the gnomemeta-package does? Same for nautilus etc.
Regards,Florian
P
P
pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote on 6 May 2019 11:14
(name . Raghav Gururajan)(address . rvgn@disroot.org)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
20190506091454.2trvy3tbe7pac7qc@pelzflorian.localdomain
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 03:57:48AM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:
Toggle quote (3 lines)> 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.>
Well, incubator apps have not enough polish. Then again, what back in2016 was an incubator app maybe works fine now — I see the bloglinking to https://wiki.gnome.org/Design/Appswhich lists Notes ascore now. Dictionary is listed as inactive/retired on the other hand.
Regards,Florian
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 6 May 2019 16:02
(name . pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))(address . pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
e698b4f061d4f607200724be69a26adb559f02aa.camel@disroot.org
Yeah! You could be right.
On Mon, 2019-05-06 at 11:05 +0200, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:
Toggle quote (20 lines)> On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 03:51:54AM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:> On 5 May 2019 16:48, "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <pelzflorian@pelzfl> orian.de> wrote:> 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. > 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.> > Maybe gnome-web could be the real package’s name and there could be> apackage called epiphany that propagates gnome-web, like the> gnomemeta-package does? Same for nautilus etc.> Regards,Florian>
Attachment: file
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 6 May 2019 16:05
(name . pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))(address . pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
36a6a5df18d9730e9a05e360c54edb75517ca479.camel@disroot.org
Ah, I see. ☺On Mon, 2019-05-06 at 11:14 +0200, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:
Toggle quote (11 lines)> On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 03:57:48AM -0400, Raghav Gururajan wrote:> 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.> > Well, incubator apps have not enough polish. Then again, what back> in2016 was an incubator app maybe works fine now — I see the> bloglinking to https://wiki.gnome.org/Design/Apps which lists Notes> ascore now. Dictionary is listed as inactive/retired on the other> hand.> Regards,Florian
Attachment: file
T
T
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote on 6 May 2019 21:20
(name . Raghav Gururajan)(address . rvgn@disroot.org)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
87zhnzfkz6.fsf@nckx
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:
Toggle quote (6 lines)> The following gnome core applications have already been included > in> guix's gnome package but requires correct renaming?>> epiphany --> gnome-web
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
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iHUEARYKAB0WIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCXNCJDQAKCRANsP+IT1VteY9uAP4295Sw4iYvtpN3guUfLbLWr50KtX0/J57gCZ+3VsY2PwEA55KKMWsL/HNZNja6Ua3Zs3/HG4WPpyTqCE2uLyLksQw==DDJo-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 6 May 2019 21:30
(name . Tobias Geerinckx-Rice)(address . me@tobias.gr)(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
e2d35da2991336f8723ebbbeb92d5e57@disroot.org
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:
Toggle quote (58 lines)> 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:> >> The following gnome core applications have already been included>> in>> guix's gnome package but requires correct renaming?>> >> epiphany --> gnome-web> > 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
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 7 May 2019 08:29
(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
7a8b3492f9882d4179cb114136de7e92@disroot.org
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 Appsgnome-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:
Toggle quote (69 lines)> 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:> >> 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:>> >>> The following gnome core applications have already been included>>> in>>> guix's gnome package but requires correct renaming?>>> >>> epiphany --> gnome-web>> >> 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
L
L
Ludovic Courtès wrote on 8 May 2019 14:49
control message for bug #35586
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
87ef59xgaa.fsf@gnu.org
retitle 35586 GNOME Core Applications
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 11 May 2019 11:48
Re: bug#35586: GNOME
(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
c48e755ec403a6f00925597bfb6247ec@disroot.org
Hello Guix Folks!
Any update on this bug please?
Regards,RG.
R
R
Ricardo Wurmus wrote on 11 May 2019 12:08
(name . Raghav Gururajan)(address . rvgn@disroot.org)
875zqhs3ps.fsf@elephly.net
Hi Raghav,
Toggle quote (2 lines)> Any update on this bug please?
not all of the GNOME applications have been packaged. Would you like totry to package some of the missing applications?
This bug has a lower priority to me than others, so I’m unlikely to workon this soon.
-- Ricardo
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 11 May 2019 12:30
(name . Ricardo Wurmus)(address . rekado@elephly.net)
a5f6915581905833151fb147d04170f6@disroot.org
Toggle quote (3 lines)> not all of the GNOME applications have been packaged. Would you like to> try to package some of the missing applications?
Sure, I will give it a try :)
Toggle quote (3 lines)> This bug has a lower priority to me than others, so I’m unlikely to work> on this soon.
I see.
Regards,RG.
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 2 Jul 2019 22:24
severity 35586 serious
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
fb444f9ccac8c9cc0f68c3d36798fdeb10d29bcd.camel@disroot.org
severity 35586 serious
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 3 Jul 2019 00:44
(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
4b2dc44253ba50bef6370e8942b822d6ec5340c3.camel@disroot.org
When I re-visited this bug thread, I thought it needed summarising, sothat 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/Design/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 arenot generic.
*ESSENTIAL TO-DOs:*
1) Change the package and application names of exsisting (alreadypackaged) GNOME Core Applications, to their generic names; according toguidelines.
2) Re-compile the "gnome" package to include exsisting GNOME CoreApplications 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 CoreApplications; 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 CoreApplications ONLY of types "Essential System" and "System Tools";according to guidelines.
2) Modify the service "gnome-desktop-service-type" in such a way wherepackage "gnome-minimal" can be used as a value (alternative to thedefault value "gnome").
Therefore, final "gnome-minimal" package should contain Base Componentsand Core Applications ONLY of types essential system and system tools.
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 3 Jul 2019 01:21
(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
c47d6c811fb699741786d831f573bdfde7f5af3f.camel@disroot.org
**SUMMARY**
*ISSUES:*
When comparing to GNOME's Official Guidelines (https://wiki.gnome.org/Design/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 allgeneric.
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 packagedescription and thus affecting the user experience.
*TO-DOs:*
1) Change the package and application names of exsisting (alreadypackaged) GNOME Core Applications, to their generic names; according toguidelines.
2) Re-compile the "gnome" package to include exsisting GNOME CoreApplications 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 CoreApplications; according to guidelines.
Therefore, final "gnome" package should contain allpackages/applications (with their respective names) according to GNOMECore (https://download.gnome.org/core/).
R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 13 Nov 2019 06:44
GNOME Core Applications
(address . 35586@debbugs.gnu.org)
f6371e3c247eaec529f975aac5d699cde37620d5.camel@disroot.org
Hello Guix!
Based on information from [1], [2], [3] and [4]; I have formulated achart 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-musicand gnome-weather.
If anyone performed anything from chart, please let me know and I willupdate the chart accordingly.
[1] https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
[2] https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2017/08/13/gnome-3-26-core-applications/
[3] https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps/
[4] https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/35586
Regards,RG.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAABCAAdFiEEamFiplxUWgy2NgJiorDiYAVcMdsFAl3LmFUACgkQorDiYAVcMdusbwf+I1t6oxkrXECe1aHATTOA94FDPXk/elFr75VFriaTB80xUexhLY4wRxACAtATwV2Lhr49bQwa/Hysj5FoglxNj8uDu7eEJ5HWBVKcT599kPzRQnWVIAX7Sh/WvxpEAZEizk2CoV2tizfRuhuKIuW9r3LL19j5bOcb3rNQ/38tQ2wnq28wgNTEP9OkUQOk1bHwfJpgBNan4IyiSdZAVJD0Etkuj/5T1OPcZyc9G2a6qE6ghQX++sRoYg83ZVTxOri8Unlz4Izsolc7iXbzbcFtX/uoyMsA+mofFNRQZw4TLR4AIJiEy2WwMKV9D94R56k748MRW3lu69qfbQBKioAO6g===xJEJ-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

R
R
Raghav Gururajan wrote on 2 Apr 19:00 +0200
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
c2871dc92622d5a99491cc293115ed0f@disroot.org
severity 35586 normal
owner 35586 !
?