David Michael wrote: > Hi, > > I am considering packaging a Mozilla extension, but I thought it best > to try to clarify some things beforehand. The only guidance (draft) I > found[1] doesn't seem to be followed by existing packages, but I agree > with it in principle. Until there are official guidelines, I have two > questions: > > Is it acceptable to follow the draft guidelines, or should new > packages attempt to conform to the existing packages' (not quite > consistent) structure? > > Is it appropriate to support any/all applications listed in the > install.rdf, even if they are not available in Fedora? (I don't see a > downside to this if the draft guidelines are followed, and it would > allow locally managed applications to take advantage of extensions > installed from RPMs.) > > Thanks for any suggestions. > > David > > > 1. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Kalev/MozillaExtensionsDraft > -- > packaging mailing list > packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging > Unless I'm mistaken, it's probably best to follow the current guidelines but keep an ear to the rail for any action on the draft. It could be problematic to follow something that may or may not ever become official. Grain of salt: I'm foggy on the exact status of said draft. -J -- in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
