4 ms·

> I'm not convinced that is any better. I manage $HOME, this is meant for valuable personal documents. I manage them manually. You as a software distributor be

> I'm not convinced that is any better. I manage $HOME, this is meant for valuable personal documents. I manage them manually. You as a software distributor better are not gonna clash with what I am doing there with your shitty engineering. If you insist on making a mess of your $HOME, XDG allows for that. You can set all your XDG variables to $HOME. And even without doing so, you can create symlinks to make your $HOME like you want. That is an unfair advantage you get with XDG adherence. XDG gives you as the user more control. If you don´t adhere to XDG, you take that control away from the user.

skywhopper 3y ago
I have to disagree here. XDG is a poor spec. It makes assumptions about structure that may not hold. If I want all my config, cache, and local stores in per-program directories, XDG makes that impossible. If I want a specific program’s config directory somewhere other than the XDG setting, that’s not possible.
- exceptione 3y ago
  You complain XDG makes assumptions while we are discussing software that makes the assumption that $USER has no say over $HOME. At least XDG is user configurable. XDG allows for a superior partitioning. If you don´t like it, you are likely to complain about Linux as well. XDG separates config, run state, cache and data, which is quite reasonable for a Linux system as that is what Linux does. --- > If I want a specific program’s config directory somewhere other than the XDG setting, that’s not possible. 1. $XDG_CONFIG_DIRS even allows for more multiple paths to be searched. 2. You could even override XDG-vars per application in a launch script or in the shortcut. > If I want all my config, cache, and local stores in per-program directories, XDG makes that impossible. You can set all the relevant $XDG_vars to $HOME and all your foo stuff ends up in $HOME/foo. Or symlink from $HOME. The XDG world gives you options, while the non-XDG world doesn´t. --- XDG could have opted for user overridable utils instead of variables. But you have already lots of options now.
rascul 3y ago
> You can set all your XDG variables to $HOME That seems like it could easily lead to conflicts.
Asooka 3y ago
Your documents should go in ~/Documents, not directly in ~. Also XDG is is specifically for X11 applications. I don't see why ones without a GUI should respect it at all.

skywhopper 3y ago

I have to disagree here. XDG is a poor spec. It makes assumptions about structure that may not hold. If I want all my config, cache, and local stores in per-program directories, XDG makes that impossible. If I want a specific program’s config directory somewhere other than the XDG setting, that’s not possible.

exceptione 3y ago
You complain XDG makes assumptions while we are discussing software that makes the assumption that $USER has no say over $HOME. At least XDG is user configurable. XDG allows for a superior partitioning. If you don´t like it, you are likely to complain about Linux as well. XDG separates config, run state, cache and data, which is quite reasonable for a Linux system as that is what Linux does. --- > If I want a specific program’s config directory somewhere other than the XDG setting, that’s not possible. 1. $XDG_CONFIG_DIRS even allows for more multiple paths to be searched. 2. You could even override XDG-vars per application in a launch script or in the shortcut. > If I want all my config, cache, and local stores in per-program directories, XDG makes that impossible. You can set all the relevant $XDG_vars to $HOME and all your foo stuff ends up in $HOME/foo. Or symlink from $HOME. The XDG world gives you options, while the non-XDG world doesn´t. --- XDG could have opted for user overridable utils instead of variables. But you have already lots of options now.

rascul 3y ago

> You can set all your XDG variables to $HOME That seems like it could easily lead to conflicts.

Asooka 3y ago

Your documents should go in ~/Documents, not directly in ~. Also XDG is is specifically for X11 applications. I don't see why ones without a GUI should respect it at all.