Op woensdag 04 april 2012 22:59:30 schreef Florian Hubold: > Am 26.03.2012 19:46, schrieb Florian Hubold: > > Hi all, > > > > i've taken a look at iceape and locally updated it to 2.7.2¹ after > > talking with maintainer > > about it, with the intent to at least push this to Mageia 1, because > > since initial import > > it has not received any security updates (and there are countless > > security problem) I've also completed the rebrand to iceape as far as i > > saw fit (change URL to release > > notes, applied some more debian rebranding patches, removed updater files > > and updater menu item, and some more smaller fixes, current svn diff is > > attached) and did some cleaning of old and unused stuff. > > > > ¹: I've only updated it to 2.7.2 as 2.8 does require newer NSPR, and > > that's a no-go for Mageia 1, which is my primary target. > > > > > > > > The biggest problem is: current maintainer does not have enough time to > > maintain it properly, and i'm not planning on doing it either, as i > > don't use it or know it well. > > > > There are at least 3 good options on how to proceed, apart from mga1 > > update: > > > > > > 1. > > push latest version to cauldron, and hope somebody will maintain it > > afterwards (this is the worst IMHO, as we'll probably face the same > > situation with a de-facto umaintained package throughout Mageia 2 > > lifetime, which i want to avoid) > > > > > > 2. > > drop iceape, package as seamonkey again and sync with Fedora > > (this one would at least make maintenance easier, only need to follow > > Fedora) > > > > > > 3. > > drop iceape completely > > (actually this has the advantage that users can have official upstream > > binaries, and take advantage of automatic updates. Current maintainer > > agrees with this, as it's simply too fragile for him to maintain it > > easily. > > If somebody is against this, please step up as maintainer or help the > > current maintainer) > > > > > > I'm currently in contact with some seamonkey developers, to maybe clear > > up why/if the > > rebrand is needed, if it's needed like it's currently done, and why > > Fedora can simply > > ship seamonkey without the need for a rebrand, but the dialog may take > > some time, this > > would be only relevant for option 2. > > > > > > If nobody responds, i'll push my current work as security update for > > Mageia 1, and drop iceape from cauldron so that we won't have an > > outdated package and a potential security risk for Mageia 2. > > > > > > Kind regards > > As there was no real objection, and no other comments > or votes for iceape, i've dropped it from cauldron. FWIW i'm quite > unhappy with this. Related, i've also not got any reply yet to my > aforementioned inquiry about mozilla branding permissions.
About the mozilla branding... Perhaps this should be a meeting point for packaging/council meeting... ie: someone assigned to this point so it's not forgotten.