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 ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs