desktop-file-install

[Todd Zullinger]

Rex Dieter wrote:
> When it comes to *current* reviews/packages, simply follow the
> current guidelines.

Sure, that seems obvious.  But there has been confusion about usage of
a vendor_id previously (which I attributed to reviewers mistaking
vendor_id for the Vendor: spec file tag).  What I was wondering was
whether there was an effort to change the guidelines regarding the
vendor_id.  If there is, the issues that *may* be caused by dropping a
vendor_id from an existing .desktop file need to be addressed.

-- 
Todd        OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
People are crazy and times are strange
I'm locked in tight, I'm out of range
I used to care, but things have changed

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 542 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20070826/0827bfb9/attachment.sig>