Public SourceMage Discussion List

["Alexander Tsamutali" <astsmtl AT gmail.com>]

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