[needs-packaging] flock

[Khorne]

Flock is a social web browser, a GPL fork of Firefox integrated with many social sites like Flickr, del.icio.us, etc. It also has tools for writing your blog.
http://flock.com/

[Gabriel Puliatti (r00t)]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 12:41:43AM -0500, David Moreno Garza wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: David Moreno Garza <email address hidden>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> * Package name : flock
> Version : 0.4.9
> Upstream Author : Flock Inc.
> * URL : http://www.flock.com/
> * License : GPL under the MPL base of Firefox.
> http://www.flock.com/developer/licensing_FAQ.php
> Description : elegant mozilla-firefox based social web browser
>
> Specially built for a new generation of Web users, Flock is designed
> for those who are not satisfied with the current media online browsing
> experience.
>
> Flock is turning the browser into a dashboard for collaborating, blogging,
> sharing photos, etc.

This sound a little like marketing speak.

>
> Built under the Mozilla Firefox codebase.
>
> Note: Yes, I know this description may seem a little pretentious
> and very comercial. Improvements for this are very welcome.

Perhaps some talk on the actual things it does? Why is it a social
browser?

Something like:

"Flock is a social browser and uses del.icio.us, etc."

Like, why is it a 'social' browser?

>
> - -- System Information:
> Debian Release: testing/unstable
> APT prefers unstable
> APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
> Architecture: i386 (i686)
> Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.12-1-686
> Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1)
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFDXHQXmBxf18ZxJX0RAlBhAJwMQCGim/KtaAu0rPVoV8RVjzNhigCdFjqf
> YGL3IxvVyrSszXo1bipzjWA=
> =wPoW
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to <email address hidden>
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact <email address hidden>
>

--
Gabriel Puliatti
predius.org

You'll feel much better once you've given up hope.

[David Moreno Garza (damog-debian)]

On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 08:19 -0500, Gabriel Puliatti wrote:
> > Flock is turning the browser into a dashboard for collaborating, blogging,
> > sharing photos, etc.
>
> This sound a little like marketing speak.

That's why I asked by collaboration by writing this:

> > Note: Yes, I know this description may seem a little pretentious
> > and very comercial. Improvements for this are very welcome.

> Perhaps some talk on the actual things it does? Why is it a social
> browser?
>
> Something like:
>
> "Flock is a social browser and uses del.icio.us, etc."
>
> Like, why is it a 'social' browser?

Yeah, I know, and I repeat, description has to be improved.

Cheers,

--
David Moreno Garza <email address hidden> | http://www.damog.net/
                   <email address hidden> | GPG: C671257D
  "The number of RC bugs in Debian is..." -Steve Langasek.

[Gerardo Curiel (gcuriel-debianvenezuela)]

# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.20
owner 335459 !

[Gerardo Curiel (gcuriel-deactivatedaccount)]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Package: wnpp
owner 335459 <email address hidden>

Thanks

- --
Gerardo Curiel <email address hidden> <email address hidden>
Geek By NaTure,LiNuX By ChOiCe,DebiAn of CoUrsE
gpg fingerprint: 228B 0F96 8653 DF52 9740 B75E FB32 9C30 E179 7BD2
http://www.debian.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFE229d+zKcMOF5e9IRAlyOAJ9cz24cmzPQ64VFJBmdTVe2kO4DxACfVipE
R5VDrjbVT1z4Co26gVoDIjA=
=/E0t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Gerardo Curiel (gcuriel-debianvenezuela)]

# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.20
owner 335459 !

[Marcela Tiznado (mtiznado)]

Package: wnpp
owner 335459 <email address hidden>

Thanks

[Khorne (szczygiel-piotr)]

Flock is a social web browser, a GPL fork of Firefox integrated with many social sites like Flickr, del.icio.us, etc. It also has tools for writing your blog.
http://flock.com/

[Przemek K. (azrael)]

https://lists.flock.com/pipermail/flock-dev/2007-March/000967.html
This thread at Flock-dev mailing list might be useful for somene who will want to package Flock.

[Soul-Sing (soulzing)]

flock is packaged: getdeb: http://www.getdeb.net/category.php?id=7
but indeed not in the offic. repos.of ubuntu.

[David Moreno (damog-espiral)]

Is there any progress on the Flock package?

If not, I really think we should RFP it.

--
David Moreno Garza <email address hidden> | http://www.damog.net/
 La prohibición del acceso a la información es contribuir al fascismo.

[Marcela Tiznado (mlt-debian)]

Going back to work on it...
Ill RFP if I can deal with it.
m*

[Sebastian Pipping (webmaster-hartwork)]

there's an alioth project for packaging klock now.
please join us if you can help out.

https://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-flock/

sebastian

[Charles Brophy (charlesbrophy)]

Flock is now at version 1.1 and a really useful and handy web browser. The get-deb version is brilliant but the icon used in the gnome menu is incorrect. Any chance of this being added to the Ubuntu repos any time soon?

[Soul-Sing (soulzing)]

=Flock is a social web browser, a GPL fork of Firefox integrated with many social sites like Flickr, del.icio.us, etc. It also has tools for writing your blog.=
a perfect "open-id" webbrowser.

[Kristopher (kristopher-munro-deactivatedaccount)]

+1 Vote

[Eric Amundson (sewmyheadon)]

I'd also love to see Flock added to the repos and would be willing to help with packaging if I could get some direction.

[Soul-Sing (soulzing)]

: http://www.flock.com/node/62014 and the award for the best social webbrowser.

[schnollk (schnollk)]

one year without any "official" comment on why flock hasn't been added to offic. repos. yet nor why it shouldn't. To be honest I'm disappointed. There are even people offering packaging help if mentored!

Can anyone with Ubuntu inside knowledge comment on this, please? I'd like to know if there has been discussion and if so what Ubuntu users ought to expect in the near future about how and when/why not flock will be seen in Ubuntu's official repos.

Cheers.

[schnollk (schnollk)]

assigning to team I think most appropriate from those I found in hope for responce/comments

[schnollk (schnollk)]

here is a more direct link to the deb at getdeb than the category one by leoquant:
http://www.getdeb.net/app/Flock

[C de-Avillez (hggdh2)]

Hi schnollk,

ubuntu-desktop does not deal with packaging requests. Only a MOTU would be really able to answer, but I would guess it has not been worked on because it has not, yet, been accepted on Debian.

[Fabien Tassin (fta)]

I used to maintain a packaging branch for flock 2 and to provide preview debs in my PPA but I stopped as there are legal issues not acceptable for Ubuntu, issues that have apparently no chance to be solved.

I just linked the branch to this bug as a reference but I don't intend to work on it again, unless of course the situation evolves.

I propose to tag this bug "won't fix".

[Alexander Sack (asac)]

unlikely that anyone of the ubuntu-mozillateam will actively work on this. flock developers could provide a free branding.

[Przemek K. (azrael)]

They do. If you won't use the branding compile switch, Flock will compile as Sulphur (or other codename) just like Firefox will compile to Bon Echo, Grand Paradiso or whatever the current codename is.

[Alexander Sack (asac)]

On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 01:39:36PM -0000, Przemysław Kulczycki wrote:
> They do. If you won't use the branding compile switch, Flock will
> compile as Sulphur (or other codename) just like Firefox will compile to
> Bon Echo, Grand Paradiso or whatever the current codename is.
>

The problem with such codenames is that they are not static. So we
package "sulphur" now, we have to dump that package when flock
codename changes to "phospor" or something.

What upstreams should provide is a decent static free branding that
will be maintained over major versions.

 - Alexander

[Jacob F. Roecker (jacobroecker)]

I hope this is resolved! I'd love to see flock on Ubuntu!

[Savvas Radevic (medigeek)]

Any progress?

There's an Ubuntu request as well:
https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/debian/+bug/332312

[David Moreno (damog)]

On Feb 20, 2009, at 8:54 PM, Savvas Radevic wrote:

> Any progress?
>
> There's an Ubuntu request as well:
> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/debian/+bug/332312

None. Feel free to take over if interested.

David Moreno
http://damog.net/

[Ron Adams (tohuw)]

Agreed with Alexander. I will refer this bug upstream to Flock, asking them to consider a free branding edition (think IceWeasel).

[Ron Adams (tohuw)]

Submitted to Flock, please vote up this feature request: https://bugzilla.flock.com/show_bug.cgi?id=16384

[Ron Adams (tohuw)]

Marcus from Flock dev reported a few interesting points that I think bear repeating here:
"'Sulfur' is not a code name, it is the the unbranded version you are looking for..

"I have expended effort in removing proprietary logos, images and text from this unbranded build, but that task is not complete. I also watch the commits to try to catch any hard-coding of the work "Flock" in new code...

"Note that it is not only Flock IP that may turn up, it is also Mozilla IP. Both need to be taken care of.

"While not related to branding, there is a second point worth mentioning: Ubuntu would like to package Flock as XULRunner application, to avoid repetitive inclusion of common code. Flock uses a modified XULRunner code base, which makes circumventing that redundancy non-trivial.

"Personally, I have always wanted to see a proper Ubuntu package for Flock; it's
just not that easy. I'm available and willing to help, but my primary
obligation is of course to do the things that Flock, the company, wants to see
move forward."

So it looks like what we need is:
1) An answer from MOTU on how they feel about divorcing flock-browser (let's be clear on referencing the package name henceforth "flock" is of course out of the question! ;) ) from XULRunner so that the customized XULRunner can coexist with the default library other XULRunner apps are using

2) Contributions to the Flock team by interested parties wanting to help root the IP out of the "Sulfur" (i.e., non-branded) build

3) ???

4) Profit!

I'm guessing from what's been said here that MOTU will want to refer this upstream, though I don't know how much interest there is at that level. I'm interested, but am way behind on the packaging side of things, and have a number of items on my plate as it is, so if anyone out there is up for stepping up to this, that'd be swell.

[Ron Adams (tohuw)]

I am following this issue for Ubuntu (
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/124933) and thought I'd share what
I've found from Flock as a result of filing a bug with them (
https://bugzilla.flock.com/show_bug.cgi?id=16384) . You can peruse the full
text there, but I'll summarize the points:

1) Both Flock and Mozilla IP exist in Sulfur, the "unbranded" Flock build.
Marcus from Flock is working on rooting this out as he has time, and
wouldn't mind the help, I'm sure.
2) Flock does not use the same XULRunner as Firefox and others, so it would
need some kind of special handling in that regard.

[Przemek K. (azrael)]

Flock has been discontinued after Flock Inc has been acquired by Zynga.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flock_%28web_browser%29