[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Binary package names for mozilla plugins [Was: Bits from the Mozilla Extension Packaging Team]

Hi -devel,

> 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.

while we are at it, maybe we could take the opportunity and introduce a
similar scheme for all packages providing mozilla-compatible browser
plugins as well?

Let's have a look at what's maybe installed on an average (i.e. my)
- flashplugin-nonfree
- icedtea6-plugin
- mozilla-openoffice.org
- totem-mozilla
- and maybe some more...

It seems to be common practice to either prefix or suffix the package
name with one of "plugin" or "mozilla", which is both inconsistent and
bad. First, because -plugin is way to general and second, because AFAIUI
we currently fork the Mozilla applications to stay out of their name

I remember this discussion has been here before. My favourite approach
these days was to suffix all packages with -browserplugin, because that
perfectly describes what the package contains, but is a little bit too
long, maybe. Given the current approach, I think some prefix like
xul-plugin- would fit better and feel more consistent with the naming
scheme of the extensions packages. What do you think?

 - Fabian

Reply to: