display the real package name

[Nicolò Chieffo]

Binary package hint: software-store

When listing packages (and when showing the package description), software store should display the real package name, if different from the corresponding .desktop file, so that the package is more recognizable

[Connor Imes (ckimes)]

Thank you for reporting this. In version 0.3.2, I see the package name listed at the bottom under the Install button along with the version. Does it need to be listed in the search display as well?

[Nicolò Chieffo (yelo3)]

Yes I thought of the search display... That's because if you need to
see the name you have to double click. While in the search display
there's plenty of unused space next to the .desktop file name

[Connor Imes (ckimes)]

Ok, I think that is a valid Wishlist item. I'm not sure if it's something that should be implemented, but we'll let the devs decide or other community members weigh in with their opinions. For the latter, you can make a request on Brainstorm to see what the community thinks - http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/
If you do, post a link to your Brainstorm idea here. Cheers.

[Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt)]

If package names weren't so user-hostile for most users (all lower case, no spaces, often heavily abbreviated, often awful names), it would be reasonable to show them by default. But since they aren't, they shouldn't be shown by default. So whatever presentation package names have, it should be off by default, but easy to turn on for the people who want to see them.

I think an appropriate design here for 2.0 would be to have a "Package Name" column for package listings, that can be toggled from the "View" menu. This column would be off by default in listings that showed mostly applications. It *might* be on by default in listings that showed mostly non-application packages. I'm not sure what this extra column would do to the position of the [->] navigation button.

Any alternative suggestions?

[Nicolò Chieffo (yelo3)]

I don't know I might have 2 other proposals:
- name in the tooltip
- or like this: Archive Manager (file-roller)

they are both not disturbing I think

[Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt)]

It's not the presentation itself that is disturbing or not, it's the contents. To use your own example, "file-roller" appears to be poorly-capitalized jargon unrelated to the program's actual purpose. The same is true of most other package names; they were never designed to be seen by the wider computer-using population. It's a decade too late to change that now, so we need to present other metadata instead whenever it is available, and any presentation of the package name needs to be off by default.

[Agustín Dall'Alba (agusdallalba)]

I think that this already is implemented. You can see the package name under the Install/Remove button.

[Nicolò Chieffo (yelo3)]

I'd like to see it in the list

[guilloip (guilleip)]

So do I,
It must be in the list and it should be optional to sort using it.

It is specially important for non-english speakers, because in the Ubuntu's translated versions, most of the times, it is impossible to find a well-known software because translations are too free done. Many times there is no relation between original English name and fantasy-name translation. That's why showing original packages name is so important.

Not using original packages name could be useful for a new user but it is a headache for the older ones.

[guilloip (guilleip)]

I think that the Matthew Paul Thomas' "Package Name" column is a good solution. It could be optionally showed too.

The Nicolò Chieffo's ideas are not good enough because you can not sort by package-name with them.

Finally, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
"If package names weren't so user-hostile for most users (all lower case, no spaces, often heavily abbreviated, often awful names), it would be reasonable to show them by default. But since they aren't, they shouldn't be shown by default. So whatever presentation package names have, it should be off by default, but easy to turn on for the people who want to see them."

It is not really true. What I mean is that is the name what identifies you, not your description, not even a short description. Because a name is unique, a well intentioned changed name is not. The name could be rewritten in many different ways.

For example, "file-roller" refers to a specific package, but if you would like to change it name, it could be changed to "Archive Manager" or "Manage your archives" or "A tool to manage files", and no body would know that you were talking about "file-roller", even more in GNU universe where there is always more than one program with the same propose.

[Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt)]

file-roller is a bad example of a unique name because it currently has an identity crisis (bug 463284). And the "GNU universe" has many *fewer* applications for most tasks than other OSes do, but applications on those other OSes still manage to have unique and human-friendly names that use spaces and capital letters.