On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 12:29:15PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 12:17:21AM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: >>> Major updates to chromium in stable have so far been contingent on it >>> being a leaf package, where there is no chance for it to break >>> anything else. Adding CEF as a reverse dependency would change that. >>> >>> This is more of a question for the release team, it would need their >>> approval. >> Agreed. > Release team, for the short recap: Would it be acceptable to have chromium > provide a chromium-source binary package, and then package CEF (Chromium > Embedded Framework) Build-Depending on that package, and then have other > packages depend on CEF? CEF aims to provide a stable API/ABI on top of > Chromium for other software to use, but needs updating whenever Chromium > releases a new major version. See #893448 for some more details.
Ping :-) Release team, do you want to weigh in? If nothing else, perhaps we could add a CEF package in unstable only (ie., with a testing blocker bug) for the time being. FWIW, I've updated my CEF packages to CEF/Chromium 69; all that was required was to patch out installation of Swiftshader (since Debian's packages now disable it). /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: https://www.sesse.net/
