http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1038368 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1038368#c12 Fabian Vogt <fvogt@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fvogt@suse.com --- Comment #12 from Fabian Vogt <fvogt@suse.com> --- (In reply to Michael Andres from comment #11)

(In reply to Fabian Vogt from comment #10)

...

IMO it's the wrong use of name. The appdata id should be used internally and the name shown to the user.

The 'name' that uniquely identifies the item is used and shown.

If this is actually the appdata id, we can adapt the libsolv parser, but then the id will be shown and has to be used as CLI arg. Otherwise appdata don't fit into our concept and we'll think about disregarding them.

Yes, it's actually the ID. The appdata name is more like the package summary and the appdata summary like the package description. For instance, you can have an org.kde.calendar with name "Calendar" and summary "Calendar for KDE" and org.gnome.calendar with name "Calendar" and summary "Calendar for GNOME". None of those fields are actually being controlled by packagers, they're published by upstream and need to be consistent across distros for software-center like applications to behave correctly. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.