I like how you spell with þorn

This is a none issue.

If its that bad it sounds like it'd be an easy fix and you can upstream the change.

That looks like porn to me

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=403194

They says it's freedesktop standard, and gnome is at fault for not implementing the standard properly. I don't have this issue in KDE. I don't understand what it meant different files are supported by different plugins, but maybe internals depend on that structure.

Anyway gnome should be supporting that standard everywhere in all their apps

Googling the issue i found this

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=403194

Says its because gnome isn't supporting that freedesktop standard for some reason. This is a non issue in kde

I don't know, seemed like you were trying to diss GIMP

I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like you know something about nondestructive editing in Krita! Can I ask you some questions about it?

Is it possible to use the smart patch tool in a nondestructive manner? I'd like it to take samples from the underlying layer(s), but apply the result to the upper (empty) layer. Just like the clone brush can do. Is it possible to do it in this way?

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/work_items/7776#note_2560841

I honestly agree with the GTK devs here. The app chooser isn't what was meant by the spec and it should show all the apps available to the user. And if KDE respects NoDisplay in the app chooser, but still shows it if the MimeType matches, then I think that's an even more conjectural reading of the spec.

I would like to see what are differences in content for thoose different desktop files. Is there any difference in launch options? Do they contain mimetype feilds? It seems like specification explicitly states it(Nodisplay) being useful for mime types so it probably is expected feature within the spec. Also spec says nodisplay should hide from "menus" which i'm not sure if its just app launcher or all menus

The argument I see all over here (from kde side) is that support for mimetypes are optional plugins, and within the spec making multiple desktop entries is the only choice when doing so.

I'm not trying to diss GIMP. I'm dissing GIMP.

No. I don't think the smart patch tool works nondestructively. There are three nondestructive systems in Krita:

1. Alpha Masks. This lets you edit transparency for a given layer. A common use is to remove backgrounds. But you can also paint or use the gradient tool for soft transitions. Gimp has had this too since at least the 2.10 series. Perhaps 2.8.

2. Alpha masking of adjustments. This lets you paint or use the gradient on an adjustment layer, such as Curves or Levels. Again, to allow for soft transitions of adjustments. Note that GIMP 3.2 currently CANNOT do this. It does have adjustments, which are called 'filters' in GIMP speak. And like Krita, they can be reordered in an adjustment/filter stack. But unlike Krita (and Ps), an adjustment/filter currently only applies to an entire layer. The adjustment can not be edited within the layer itself on a mask.

3. Layer Styles. This is commonly used for nondestructively adding styles to text, like drop shadow, sparkle, glow, etc. Gimp got this in 3.0.

Gimp has made some real improvements with the 3.x series. But it still lacks basic functionality that Ps has had since 1997 with Photoshop 7.0, and Krita has had for something like fifteen years. But it's getting there. And it does have better adjustments/filters than Krita. And it has had editing text on the canvas since 2.10 (I think?), whereas that's being deployed for Krita 6.0 I believe.

This is true, but it is not possible to solve every problem you come across; sometimes the most you have time to do to help is to provide feedback. It is also much more efficient for someone who already has experience and familiarity with the codebase to make the change. "Do it yourself" should not be the first option taken.

For example, after learning from experienced people in this thread, I now know that if I had tried to implement this change myself, it would either be rejected or I would have wasted an hour or two of research finding out why it would be rejected-- apparently this program's plugin system has plugins make new desktop files, so it's done this way for plugin support. An experienced maintainer of this project would know that and avoid wasting time on a change (or have the social authority to make the choice to move to a different desktop file system for plugins).