Packaging request #1899
We already have No Script and uBlock Origin in Iceweasel. We are missing HTTPS Everywhere.
Updated by theova over 1 year ago
HTTPS-Everywhere is licensed under the following licenses:
Copyright © 2010-2018 Electronic Frontier Foundation and others
Licensed GPL v2+
HTTPS Everywhere Rulesets (src/chrome/content/rules):
To the extent copyright applies to the rulesets, they can be used according to GPL v2 or later.
Issue Format Bot (utils/issue-format-bot/*):
Copyright © 2017 AJ Jordan, AGPLv3+
The build system incorporates code from Python 3.6
Copyright © 2001-2018 Python Software Foundation; All Rights Reserved
HTTPS-everywhere is included in GNU Icecat by defaut.
So licenses have been examined by FSF.
As I understand, the PKGBUILD doensn't build the plugin from source. I'm not sure if this is a problem.
I was able to build the package for all 3 architectures.
I was able to run the plugin in iceweasel 67.0 (64-bit).
Maintenance load of this package¶
HTTPS is included in the official Arch repositories.
To make it appliable to Parabola, one has to change
The maintenance load is therefore rather low.
I am willing to further contribute to this packet with furder rebulding and patches.
I propose to add this package to [libre].
Updated by eschwartz over 1 year ago
If firefox-extension-https-everywhere is being modded to become iceweasel-extension-https-everywhere then it might thematically make sense to have it in libre. The interesting question, though, is whether you should also repackage all the other archlinux-provided extensions (at least check to see if they meet your distribution guidelines).
noscript and ublock-origin are also in libre, vimperator (which was never in archlinux) is in pcr...
Updated by bill-auger over 1 year ago
there are various opinions on what [libre] should be for - i think the consensus is that anything on the blacklist should have its replacement in [libre] - i had assumed that everything in the [libre] repo was one-to-correlated replacements of an analogous package from arch that have a blacklist entries; but that is not actually the case - others have told me to put anything into [libre] that is considered important or essential for the system or for maintenance, even if there is no analogous package in arch - that is, treating it essentially as the parabola equivalent of [core]
personally i dont like mixing concerns in that way - just as most of the openrc support was put into [nonsystemd], i would have suggested a new repo to clearly distinguish "stuff in arch that was replaced" from "important tools that are not in arch" - its not quite clear what must be in that latter group; but there are packages in [libre] that have no counter-part in arch
anyways, arch packages several other popular firefox add-ons that we are suppressing without replacements, probably all merely for having 'firefox' in the package name - one of the blacklisting reasons is 're-branding', so this package does belong in [libre]; and we should probably look into re-packaging the others below: