On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 19:49 +0000, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > Also from Jo: > > In order to clean up, perhaps Canonical and Ubuntu would consider > > a much louder support for XDG Base Directory Specification? Many > > developers are hesitant to follow it, perhaps a strong leadership > >is required there as well? > > This seems like a real win, too. Looks like quite a few apps do support it. > > This sort of thing is useful for us to say "is a requirement for main > inclusion in the next LTS", to try an accelerate adoption. I guess what I think we should look at here is why they're not adopting it. I know when we made the switch for Inkscape one of the larger issues was the migration of data and settings. I think that this is an issue that we have as a larger context in the distro as well. The package hooks that we've used are a bit fragile. Perhaps a good contribution here is a mechanism to make change painless. (well, as painless as change can ever be) For the idea of it being a requirement for main I think we'd need a way to test it -- which is something I'm not sure how we'd accomplish. --Ted
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part