Re: Draft Mozilla extension packaging policy

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:09:39PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 04:00:57PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> [..snip..] 
> > > Does this make sense? If so I'll add this to the wiki as start of an
> > > extensions policy.
> > 
> > This sounds good to me, and maybe it's enough of a change to every
> > single existing package that everyone can be equally grumpy about it ;)
> > The rationale does a good job of outlining the reasons why this
> > standardization would be useful.
> > 
> > I'd say we should start it up on the wiki as a draft of a proposed
> > extensions policy.
> 
> I've added this here:
> 
> http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianMozExtTeam#PolicyforpackagingXULbasedapplications
> 
> > Is there anyone not on this list who we should explicitly ask to look at
> > the draft once it's published in a canonical spot?
> Added as cc: 
> 
> Dear Mozilla maintainers, we'd be happy to get some feedback on the
> above policy draft.

I don't really like the xul-ext- prefix for the packages name, but I
must say I'm not very satisfied with mozilla- either. At least, that's
what is currently used in the archive.

Speaking of the archive, I see no package using
/usr/share/xul-extensions already, but some do use
/usr/share/mozilla-extensions (but they are all mine) and have done for
a very long time.

Note that upstream supports
/usr/share/mozilla/extensions/{application-uuid}/ directories, and there
may be /usr/share/mozilla/extensions/common supported at some time in
the future, out of the box.

Mike

-- 
Ubuntu-mozillateam mailing list
Ubuntu-mozillateam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-mozillateam