[Bug 239336] Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=239336 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 239336] Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239336 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-20 18:51 EST --- Hi, I noticed that xulrunner was approved as a feature for Fedora 8. In OLPC-2 branch it is even already imported (for quite a while), so now we are only waiting when it lands into rawhide. So, it might have an effect on this review... Do you know whether it can be built against it (the OLPC's SRPM rebuilds fine on Fedora 7)? I think it will need some changes to the Makefiles but the xulrunner(-devel) packages should have got all that is needed to build it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 239336] Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239336 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-03 03:32 EST --- You're right. Other distro simply build this extension during thunderbird build. Really the simplest way. But i really don't think C.Aillon will be ok with this (already discussed). See Bug #175451 and #211371. But feel free to post this on the devel list. When FF 3 will be available (F8, F9 ?), with separated runtime/devel engine (gecko/xulrunner), i think this will become possible. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 239336] Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239336 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-01 05:55 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) The thunderbird patches are probably not needed for enigmail, bug i prefer to use exactly the same build tree than thunderbird to avoid any problem. And this way the spec is simpler to maintain ;) Hmm... I though exactly the oposity in the case of simplicity of maintaining, but you have the direct experience... For the License, i probably could add : http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/MPL-1.1.txt But, this information is available in the About option. Hm... that way it's probably OK, but it wouldn't hurt adding the licence as other source and marking it as %%doc -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 239336] Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239336 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-01 06:04 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) I'm waiting for the review before editing the spec, quite long to build :( I also have to add the es-ES langpack which is now available. I could take the review, but I am still quite unsure with the approach of aside building of thunderbird. I mean, at least theoretically, all the thunderbird files that are needed to build enigmail should go to thunderbird-devel package (which is currently not created AFAIK) and then enigmail's makemake and Makefile.in's should be patchable to use the files available in the package. I just don't like that for such a small extension (about 0.5 MB) we need approx 35 MB big source package and that it takes so long (because of the inclusion tb build) to build. Just feel this is an issue which needs at least to be discused. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 239336] Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239336 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-31 03:30 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) After quick look on your spec one question came in mind. I have no experience with packaging plugins for thunderbird/firefox but is it really needed to build whole thunderbird aside? Hm... I answered myself after a bit more digging in the spec and enigmail homepage... Yes, and No. We do not need whole thunderbird, only part of it. So the question now is: does the patches to thunderbird affect the enigmail build? Apart from this question your spec file looks pretty good, only I don't see there any documentation, but that's probably OK, as there isn't any in upstream tarball either, but there is also no licence in separate file, you should query upstream about that, I think. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 239336] Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239336 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-31 16:44 EST --- The thunderbird patches are probably not needed for enigmail, bug i prefer to use exactly the same build tree than thunderbird to avoid any problem. And this way the spec is simpler to maintain ;) For the License, i probably could add : http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/MPL-1.1.txt But, this information is available in the About option. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 239336] Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239336 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-31 16:47 EST --- I'm waiting for the review before editing the spec, quite long to build :( I also have to add the es-ES langpack which is now available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 239336] Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239336 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-30 16:03 EST --- After quick look on your spec one question came in mind. I have no experience with packaging plugins for thunderbird/firefox but is it really needed to build whole thunderbird aside? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 239336] Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunderbird-enigmail - Enigmail extension for Mozilla Thunderbird https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239336 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-30 18:54 EST --- There may have been a bug, but its gone now let me explain. I installed the thunderbird 2.0 directly from the development repository on two fc6 servers, both use enigmail (gnupgp). There is no problem at all. However - when you first run thunderbird, it goes through its update checks (much like if you updated firefox from 1 to 2) and then it complains that enigmail 0.94 is not compatible. You then highlight it and click find update (its all part of the update check screen), it goes and puts in enigmail 0.95 and it all works just perfectly. Perhaps the enigmail update was not ready back then, but I assure you it all works 100% and so much better than thunderbird 1.5 and I have not had a single problem. I send and receive lots of emails a day. So its definitely not a bug. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
