PDA

View Full Version : Should we file bugs against apps not following XDG specification?

Bou
May 21st, 2008, 03:40 AM
Hi,

I've noticed that some apps have started moving their data and configuration files to ~/.local/share and ~/.config.

Is that a new standard? What's its importance? Should we file bugs against apps that are not following it, e.g. rhythmbox? If so, what would the rational be?

I for one would love to get rid of all those .configuration folders in my /home.
23meg
May 21st, 2008, 04:07 AM
That's the XDG Base Directory specification (http://standards.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-0.6.html). I suggest you either file bugs in upstream bug trackers, or contact upstreams in their preferred way (usually posting to their development mailing lists) about it.
Bou
May 21st, 2008, 04:12 AM
But what's the relevance of following it? I'd rather have a solid argument before contacting them, instead of just personal preference.
23meg
May 21st, 2008, 04:40 AM
The rationale of the specification is having a unified, predictable behavior across all free software applications, rather than having thousands of applications each of which go about things their own way. Still, like all other fd.o specifications, it's essentially non-binding; there's no "fd.o compliance" stamp, other than the LSB, which is a much wider set of specifications that include some fd.o ones.
Lieter
May 26th, 2008, 02:13 PM
That's the XDG Base Directory specification (http://standards.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-0.6.html). I suggest you either file bugs in upstream bug trackers, or contact upstreams in their preferred way (usually posting to their development mailing lists) about it.
isn't this behaviour gonna break upgrades... since all personal data is in .[program name]?

Or will update-manager refractor(that's i think te right word) all the users' homedirs?
23meg
May 26th, 2008, 04:50 PM
That would be fixed per application in the packaging by the maintainer.
meastp
May 28th, 2008, 01:14 PM
Rhythmbox already has this bug. Search for gnome-love bugs on Rhythmbox to find it.
talkingwires
May 29th, 2008, 01:19 PM
That would be fixed per application in the packaging by the maintainer.Just to clarify, do we report bugs to the application's maintainers or to Launchpad?

I think having a consistent directory for configuration files is a long overdue idea. Will /etc, /var, and /usr/share be next?
Druke
May 29th, 2008, 02:02 PM
it was suggested to report it upstream in their preferred method
talkingwires
May 29th, 2008, 03:07 PM
it was suggested to report it upstream in their preferred methodGotcha.

I guess after the beta lands and upstream still hasn't fixed their package, we report to Launchpad, right?
aamukahvi
May 29th, 2008, 04:26 PM
I think having a consistent directory for configuration files is a long overdue idea. Will /etc, /var, and /usr/share be next?
What's wrong with those directories?
Amaranth
June 3rd, 2008, 04:13 AM
This is not something we would be doing in Ubuntu as it doesn't matter either way and would be a gigantic amount of work. Please do not ever file bugs in Launchpad about this, we are not going to work on it.
Quikee
June 3rd, 2008, 06:50 AM
This is not something we would be doing in Ubuntu as it doesn't matter either way and would be a gigantic amount of work. Please do not ever file bugs in Launchpad about this, we are not going to work on it.

There is no easy "to upstream" delegation system in Launchpad? I always thought there is such a thing in place - bad :(
23meg
June 3rd, 2008, 07:57 AM
There is no easy "to upstream" delegation system in Launchpad? I always thought there is such a thing in place - bad :(

Bugs can be forwarded upstream once filed in Launchpad, but someone (a triager) still needs to decide what is an upstream bug and what is not. With issues like this, if people file bug reports in the upstream bug trackers directly, that saves the triage work on the Ubuntu side.
Amaranth
June 3rd, 2008, 01:38 PM
Someone has to actually file the bug upstream then tell launchpad it exists. There is no automated system.

An automated system would likely be abused as people would not stop to check if this bug is Ubuntu-specific or something that affects upstream as well.
meastp
June 3rd, 2008, 01:49 PM
Someone has to actually file the bug upstream then tell launchpad it exists. There is no automated system.

An automated system would likely be abused as people would not stop to check if this bug is Ubuntu-specific or something that affects upstream as well.

I read a blog post on this, and I think the author filed bugs against most of the gnome applications, so I'm sure a search on XDG in Gnome bugzilla will yield results.