blaskovic.branislav at gmail.com
Mon Nov 11 08:12:34 UTC 2013
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 04:06:18PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Nov 2013 01:35:41 +0000, Ian Malone wrote:
> > > Please don't let it install applications, which cannot be started via the
> > > graphical desktop user interface (such as a menu system or a list of
> > > installed Applications). Users, who install software with the help of a
> > > graphical program, expect that afterwards they can find and launch the
> > > installed software via the graphical desktop user interface. Alternatively,
> > > the installer ought to offer launching something as the next step.
> > No they don't.
> You're free to claim that, but my experience differs, so it's very likely
> that we won't agree about this.
> An example with a truncated package description:
> Name : ImageMagick
> Group : Applications/Multimedia
> Description :
> ImageMagick is an image display and manipulation tool for the X
> Window System. [...]
> ImageMagick also includes command line programs for creating
> animated or transparent .gifs, creating composite images, creating
> thumbnail images, and more.
> ImageMagick is one of your choices if you need a program to manipulate
> and display images.
> The package does not include a .desktop file. Using GNOME Shell search,
> it is not locatable when entering "Image" or "Magic". This is confusing
> users. Examining the package further, it turns out the "man ImageMagick"
> manual page mentions:
> The functionality of ImageMagick is typically utilized from the command
> line or you can use the features from programs written in your favorite
> programming language.
> > I think it's perfectly reasonable that there could be a
> > GUI program can install components and terminal commands. After all we
> > can start GUI programs from the command line.
yes, you are right with ImageMagic - no doubt. I don't want to support the idea
of this thread but there are many of apps which are made for terminal but users
are running them mostly without arguments. For example - irssi, BitchX, mc,
newsbeuter, alsamixer(I am still using the cli one), mutt(kind of), alpine,
nethack, and others. Of course - you can run it with arguments but regular user
who uses that GUI tool to install apps will not use its arguments for first
I know a lot of people who have its own workarounds to start irssi/mutt from
"alt-f2 menu". I have my own script to start vim in terminal to be able to open
text files from Firefox directly in classic terminal vim (I hate gvim).
Just my two cents.
> We cannot start GUI programs from the command line when the DISPLAY
> variable is not set or invalid. ;-p
> > Installer offering to run something for you is something that's always
> > irritated me ("you've installed this! do you want to run it now?!"). I
> > can live with it if it's useful for the majority of people, but I
> > don't see why it's obvious that this "should" happen.
> I don't refer to "launching CLI programs after installation", because
> that is _impossible_, and only having users stare at the --help output
> in a terminal window would not be a great feature at all.
> I recommend that anything that is installable via a GUI package tool (or
> application installer) offers the option to _either_ start the installed
> thing as the next step (which is feasible, if it's a GUI application) _or_
> to continue with a jump to a system settings tool where to configure the
> installed thing (e.g. a service, daemon, applet), which is not a program
> that would be listed as an installed application.
> Conclusively, if it became possible to install "ImageMagick" via
> "gnome-software", the installed software ought to register itself as
> an ordinary application in the menu system (or applications list), even
> if starting it that way would only open a Help browser that explains
> how ImageMagick is supposed to be used.
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
More information about the devel