On 2015/03/15 20:54, Landry Breuil wrote: > On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 11:04:45AM -0600, attila wrote: > > > > Stuart Henderson <st...@openbsd.org> writes: > > > > > On 2015/03/14 07:25, Jiri B wrote: > > >> Couldn't this be a flavor of (your cloned) firefox-esr in the beginning? > > > > > > That will likely get in the way of people updating firefox-esr.. > > > > Perhaps I could truly automate the generation of patches in a way that > > would simplify this. Of course there can always be some issue that > > involves manual intervention, like a conflict in a firefox-esr patch > > with a Tor browser patch. As long as they were detected and flagged > > by the automation it might not be too onerous. I'm willing to go this > > way if landry@ agrees, since he's the maintainer. It feels to me like > > a flavor of firefox-esr is worth pursuing now that I'm thinking about > > it that way. > > Having it as a flavor of firefox-esr will put the burden of ensuring > that those damn patches still apply at each update on me..
+1. This is going to be far worse than the horrible sidebar patch to mutt. Unless it's kept separate, it *will* get in the way of security fixes to firefox-esr.
