seamonkey for etch ?

[Mike Hommey]

On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 10:04:42PM +0200, Alexander Sack <asac at jwsdot.com> wrote:
> OK, so lets discuss some basics like preferred package layout
> etc. Please comment and object:
> 
>  + package layout: upstream orig.tar.gz (no embedded tarball) ... but
>  separate patches included (dpatch or something)

dpatch is what I use for xulrunner. Tarball in tarball is something I
hate, I'm happy to see you don't want that :)

>  + packages needed:
>    + all current mozilla application equivalents + the -dev, but
>    without libxxx packages.

Why would we need mozilla-dev packages at all ?

>    + a dbg package ... I want to see a dbg for all mozilla packages we
>    have in etch. I will reupload a thunderbird build which I cancelled
>    previously because I wanted security fixes to go into etch
>    first.

Agreed

>  + maintenance place:
>    + svn used by jaldhar?

Why not ? Though if we go for the complete checkin, we'd probably rather
use a separate svn tree. Creating one for the team, if there isn't any
yet, could be a good idea.

>    + complete checkin ... deflated

For both firefox and xulrunner, we are using a complete checkin, and it
doesn't waste so much space, the repository is actually smaller than the
checked out tree. Firefox has patches applied, but xulrunner uses dpatch,
having the complete tree in svn helps me to generate the patches
efficiently.

>  + initial work-load:
>    + mike reviews his patches clears up which ones are needed for
>    archs, build system etc.

I'll do that in the next few days.

>    + I move package to layout (orig.tar.gz + patches) as mentioned
>    above (or whatever we decide to use)
>    + anyone who has time does the work to tweak configure options and
>    debhelper files to produce the packages mentioned above. We can
>    either split this up in front or just first comes first serves?
> 
> Anything important I missed?

Sounds good :)

Cheers

Mike