Personally, I don't think that www browsers should be made recommendations and
not dependencies.
Let me quote the debian policy:
The Depends field should be used if the depended-on package is required
for the depending package to provide a significant amount of
functionality.
While:
The Recommends field should list packages that would be found together
with this one in all but unusual installations.
Now, I hope you agree that to provide a significant amount of
functionality for this plugin a www browser is needed?
Whether it makes sense or not to add xulrunner to the list of dependancies
(or-ed!) its a matter of testing it.
For instance, I have not added it to gecko-mediaplayer yet (from the same
upstream author) simply because I don't have any evidence that it will work.
Just the fact that it makes sense that it works is not enough (for instance
gecko-mediaplayer should work with Opera and Konqueror, but it doesn't).
Can you perhaps test it and confirm if the mozilla-mplayer works with xul based
applications (via xulrunner)?
** Changed in: mplayerplug-in (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Nicolas Valcárcel (nxvl)
Status: Confirmed => Incomplete
--
mozilla-mplayer unnecessarily depends on gecko browsers
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/137993
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
