Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] GRAPHICAL-WEB-BROWSER and friends...

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Alexander Tsamutali" <astsmtl AT gmail.com>
  • To: SM-Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] GRAPHICAL-WEB-BROWSER and friends...
  • Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:48:13 +0500

2006/11/9, Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>:
Alexander Tsamutali wrote:
>> Perhaps leave the GRAPHICAL-WEB-BROWSER for future use, and add a
>> NS-PLUGIN provider and use that for packages that provide Netscape
>> plug-in functionality.
> I want to hear more opinions here. I'm not sure that we need
> GRAPHICAL-WEB-BROWSER because i don't know spell which depend on
> _some_ graphical browser.

Flash comes to mind, mplayerplug-in as well. There are probably others.

> Another question is the name of new
> provider:
> NS-PLUGIN-COMPATIBLE
> NS-COMPATIBLE
> NS-PLUGIN
> Which is better?

NS-PLUGIN is shorter and provides enough information with the name, IMO.

-sandalle
I think you misunderstood me. NS-PLUGIN-COMPATIBLE will be provided by
spells compatible with NS plugins (firefox, kdebase, opera, xulrunner)
etc. flash, mplayerplugin etc. will depend on NS-PLUGIN-COMPATIBLE.
So, for example:
* dillo will provide only GRAPHICAL-WEB-BROWSER
* opera and kdebase will provide GRAPHICAL-WEB-BROWSER and
NS-PLUGIN-COMPATIBLE
* xulrunner will provide GECKO and NS-PLUGIN-COMPATIBLE (but not
GRAPHICAL-WEB-BROWSER!).

But atleast lyx could(I think) and should depend on any webbrowser
acctually...
http://bugs.sourcemage.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13062
http://bugs.sourcemage.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13063
OK, seems like it's better to leave GRAPHICAL-WEB-BROWSER and add
NS-PLUGIN-COMPATIBLE or NS-COMPATIBLE. Still not sure which is
better...

--
Alexander Tsamutali




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page