Opened on 08/14/2014 at 10:22:28 AM
Closed on 09/22/2017 at 04:54:50 PM
#1225 closed change (rejected)
Please add a MetaInfo file for software centers
| Reported by: | hughsient | Assignee: | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Unknown | Milestone: | |
| Module: | Automation | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | sebastian, trev | Blocked By: | |
| Blocking: | Platform: | Firefox | |
| Ready: | no | Confidential: | no |
| Tester: | Unknown | Verified working: | no |
| Review URL(s): | |||
Description
Background
It's not obvious or easy to install the Adblock plugin in Linux. GNOME Software (GNOME) and Apper (KDE) consume some metadata called AppStream, but it requires upstream applications to ship an extra file before it's useful. With the extra file, the plugin can easily be installed with a simple [ ] checkbox in the "Addons" section of compatible browsers. See https://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2014/06/11/application-addons-in-gnome-software/ for more descriptions and an example screenshot.
What to change
Please consider including the attached file in the adblockplus-source.tgz tarball. It has to be named mozilla-adblockplus.metainfo.xml (or, the ID name needs changing to match) and should be installed to /usr/share/appdata on Linux. I'm happy to reassign copyright or change the licence as required. Thanks!
Richard
Attachments (1)
Change History (5)
Changed on 08/14/2014 at 10:22:52 AM by hughsient
comment:1 Changed on 09/16/2014 at 10:19:21 AM by greiner
- Component changed from Unknown to Build-and-Release-Tools
comment:2 Changed on 02/20/2015 at 09:24:18 AM by sebastian
- Cc sebastian trev added
As far as I know we don't build the distro packages, but the respective package maintainers do. However we could enable buildtools to generate a file like this. @trev: Do you think that makes sense?
comment:3 Changed on 05/20/2015 at 02:22:39 PM by philll
- Platform changed from Firefox/Firefox Mobile to Firefox
Made Firefox and Firefox mobile available as seperate platforms.
comment:4 Changed on 09/22/2017 at 04:54:50 PM by sebastian
- Resolution set to rejected
- Status changed from new to closed
- Tester set to Unknown
The referred blog post states:
We’ve deliberately not targeted Chrome or Firefox, as these applications will do a much better job compared to the package-centric operation of GNOME Software.
Regardless, I would like to see some intend by package maintainers to include this file (and want us to provide it), before including it in our code base. Simply adding it won't do anything, as browser extensions (usually), don't come with an installation script, since they are usually installed from AMO or the Chrome Web Store. So package maintainers would have to explicitly pick it up.
Also it will be some effort to keep it up to date, something we certainly would want to automate, by having the file auto-generated. But this is only worth it if it is actually going to be used.
file example