Gimp vs GNU Image Manipulation Program

[Martin Sourada]

On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 10:49 +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 17:06 +0100, Robi wrote:
> > So why don't you just put:
> > "GNU Image Manipulation Program (GIMP)", "Internet messenger (Pidgin)"
> > etc.... Everybody happy, right?
> 
> Weeell. This would mean that somebody would have to whip the GNOME panel
> into shape first so that it actually displays "Generic Name (Name)".
> Then everybody and their uncle would have to fix desktop files which
> have generic names as "Name" to work around that deficiency. Kind of a
> catch-22 if you ask me. Perhaps we should propose that as a feature for
> F10.
 From a quick look into my menu it seems like now most of the software
installed in gnome by default use "Name Generic Name" in their desktop
files (like Epiphany Web Browser), which I think is the best way to do
that. But I am well aware that other people might think otherwise.

The problem with GIMP is however that GNU Image Manipulation Program is
not a generic name but it's full name (GIMP is just an acronym). And
while the long name is quite suited for standalone usage (i.e. without
the generic name part displayed) GIMP might be better for the long
variant, though I am not certainly sure what would its generic name be,
perhaps "Raster Graphics Editor" (following the example of "Inkscape
Vector Graphics Editor").

But I agree with Nicu that the most important thing is consistency. It
indeed would make sense to propose that as a feature for F10, regardless
which format for display we decide to use... And if such a feature would
be indeed proposed, I think it should be worked on with upstream as much
as possible.

Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/attachments/20080326/d698aaf2/attachment.sig>