On 11.12.19 10:32, Till Wegmüller <[email protected]> wrote: > > I concur. Some politeness goes a long way. This problem with the license > requirements however stems from firefox originally. Only that in > firefox'es case they fought with the debian community and lost. It seems > like the Palemoon community needs to have the same experience. Sadly.... > > Anyhow. Thanks for the work on Palemoon and bringing it to the point of > being distributed as binary. If you would like to contribute more to > OpenIndiana and learn how the oi-userland build system works have a look > at the developers corner in the docs [0] > > Manifest files (p5m) are usually genered with the make target > "sample-manifest" and then have some small changes added on top. If any > special cases are required we point them out during Merging of the Pull > Request. > > We would greatly welcome if you worked on more packages. > > Greetings > Till > > > [0] http://docs.openindiana.org/dev/userland/ > > On 11.12.19 09:40, Alexander Pyhalov via oi-dev wrote: > > Hi. > > I was a bit of uncomfortable to point to this issue, but as others already > > mention this, let this be settled. We will not distribute Pale Moon via OI > > infrastructure. If someone has free cycles, I'd advice him to look at FF > > component, which needs some love. > > > > Best regards, > > Alexander Pyhalov, > > system administrator of Southern Federal University IT department > > > > ________________________________________ > > От: Adam Števko <[email protected]> > > Отправлено: 11 декабря 2019 г. 11:36 > > Кому: OpenIndiana Developer mailing list > > Тема: Re: [oi-dev] Would OI be interested in Pale Moon? > > > > Thanks Michal for pointing that out. I wasn’t aware of that. Additional > > reason to avoid it then :) > > > >> On 11 Dec 2019, at 09:22, Michal Nowak via oi-dev <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> On 12/11/19 07:38 AM, Jeremy Andrews wrote: > >>> I ported UXP to illumos and Solaris recently, and I got them to take the > >>> code upstream. I'm pretty anxious about the process now honestly, and > >>> really want everything to work out. There are a few things I'm worried > >>> about, though. > >>> 1. I'm not very familiar with how packages are actually packaged for OI, > >>> and the p5m file for Firefox in particular is... so complicated that > >>> I've been holding off creating a Pale Moon system package for OI until > >>> now, when they're pushing me to try. I was hoping that the subject > >>> wouldn't come up and they'd just want to distribute a binary .tar.xz > >>> file like they do for other operating systems (that kind of package is > >>> very easy to create with a single command). I'm so mixed up because the > >>> .p5m file for Firefox 52 looks so different from the one for Firefox 60, > >>> and includes all these header files, is for 32-bit, etc. And I'm trying > >>> to figure out which differences are due to a change in package design, > >>> and which are due to actual differences in Firefox. > >>> 2. Pale Moon has some unusual requirements. For one thing, it can't use > >>> the system NSS because Mozilla has changed the API somewhat since they > >>> forked. In general, they're leery of using system libraries over the > >>> ones in their own tree because sometimes those libraries have to be > >>> modified in specific ways for the browser. On top of that, they seem to > >>> have a problem with distributing the langpacks with the browser. They > >>> have a site where you can download a langpack of your choice, but you > >>> can't ship it with the browser for some reason. > >>> I'm kind of afraid now that I've done all this for nothing. I'm worried > >>> that their packaging requirements and our packaging requirements may not > >>> line up, and I'll wind up only being able to distribute a tarball on my > >>> own web space that no one will ever download. It's a very good browser, > >>> and the people behind it are actually decent people, but... I'm > >>> overwhelmed with the sense that I've gotten in over my head. > >> > >> Given the hostility Pale Moon developers showed towards a license > >> non-complying OpenBSD port at > >> https://github.com/jasperla/openbsd-wip/issues/86, I'd rather avoid this > >> community at all. > >> > >> The other reason is maintenance cost on the OpenIndiana project. We > >> already have Firefox and due to it's complexity it gives us hard time to > >> keep-up even with ESR releases (currently we are stuck at version 60, 68 > >> is the latest one; the story for the 52->60 transition was the same). Same > >> with Thunderbird. I am afraid Pale Moon would be another chapter of the > >> very same story. > >> > >> Michal > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> oi-dev mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > oi-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev > > _______________________________________________ > > oi-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > oi-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev >
get we rid of the rust lang monster there? I would it prefer to the FF.
_______________________________________________ oi-dev mailing list [email protected] https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
