[Pkg-mozext-maintainers] [proposal] XUL Extensions policy additions

[Benjamin Drung]

Am Dienstag, den 17.11.2009, 14:15 +0100 schrieb Mike Hommey:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 12:27:23AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > Finally, I wonder if we don't actually need to allow some extensions
> > (I'm actually thinking about langpacks) to install directly under
> > /usr/lib/appname/extensions. The fact is, we may have 3 different kinds
> > of extensions instead of 2:
> > - Extensions that work in several applications
> > - Extensions that work in one application whatever its branding is
> > - Extensions that work in one application and depends on its branding
> > IIRC, langpacks *do* include branding. To take an example, iceweasel and
> > firefox share the same application id, which is something you'd want, by
> > design. But the problem is that if we'd install iceweasel langpacks in
> > the /usr/share/mozilla/extensions/iceweasel-appid, firefox would also be
> > getting these extensions, that could very well rename some items from
> > Firefox to Iceweasel, which is kind of unexpected.
> > But maybe I'm just being overzealous, here, and we needn't care.
> 
> Similarly, lanpacks should be exempt of the xul-ext- package naming,
> IMHO.

Yes, definitely.

-- 
Benjamin Drung
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Maintainer (www.debian.org)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mozext-maintainers/attachments/20091117/da91efc7/attachment.pgp>