Re: Bits from the Mozilla Extension Packaging Team
Benjamin Drung wrote the following on 01.02.2010 20:34
Hello
I would like to ask 2 question as user regarding your proposal.
-- <snip> --
> Binary package name
> ===================
>
> The Mozilla extension packaging team decided to use xul-ext- (instead of
> mozilla-, iceweasel-, etc.) as prefix for all Mozilla extensions [1].
> This will group the extensions visually. There are currently 18
> extensions that use this naming scheme already. Please rename the binary
> package if not already done.
-- <snip> --
> Joining our team
> ================
>
> You are welcome to join our team. We maintain all packages in git in the
> pkg-mozext group. You can contact us via email or IRC [3]. Please let us
> know, if you need help implementing the above mentioned items.
Question 1:
You propose to use the prefix "xul-ext-" which is more generic i guess but
the itself is called "pkg-mozext".
Is that "moz" in the team name for historic reasons? Or is it planed to
rename it "pkg-xul-ext" Team?
It just sounds strange because these two are contradictory to your proposal.
> Work needing package
> ====================
>
> Here is a list of source package that need to updated. Please let me
> know, if I missed some packages.
>
> beagle
> biofox
> ctxextensions
> diggler
> firegpg
> foxyproxy
> icedove-attachmentreminder
> icedove-gcontactsync
> icedove-quotecolors
2nd question:
In the good old days (when ever these were) someone like a short sighted
person like me could search via apt or aptitude for *compatible* extentions
to his application.
Now does it mean, that all those xulrunner based apps can make use the same
extensions?
e.g. does ist make sens to use "xul-ext-quotecolors" with iceweasle?
Realy i don't get so please explain a bit more deeply.
regards
--
bye Thilo
4096R/0xC70B1A8F
721B 1BA0 095C 1ABA 3FC6 7C18 89A4 A2A0 C70B 1A8F
Reply to: