Bug 397246 gives us ChatZilla language packs and packages them into tarballs and zips in the locale repackaging step, but we also want to pack them into installer and install them together with ChatZilla.

Used the same approach as we used for venkman langpacks (Bug 412778). Tested using WinVista.

Comment on attachment 316522 [details] [diff] [review] package CZ langpacks v1 I don't think this needs my sr but it probably needs ChatZilla review.

Comment on attachment 316522 [details] [diff] [review] package CZ langpacks v1 Just passing by - this looks good from code inspection to me, though I didn't actually test it (I have no Windows dev machine here). As Neil said, you might want to request r?gijskruitbosch as well for the chatzilla changes.

Why exactly do we need to change the name of the lang packs?

We are not changing the name, just using variable defined in http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla/source/extensions/irc/locales/Makefile.in#65 instead of hardcoding it. The name remains the same.

(In reply to comment #5) > We are not changing the name, just using variable defined in > http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla/source/extensions/irc/locales/Makefile.in#65 > instead of hardcoding it. The name remains the same. > Well, right. I suppose the more correct phrasing would have been "why are we changing how we generate it?". I don't really care so much, though. My makefile fu is really non-existant, but can you try to explain why in line #97 and further, we're referencing $(STAGEDIST)/extensions/$(INSTALL_EXTENSION_ID) and then in your additions in this patch, you're using $(STAGEDIST)/optional/extensions/$(INSTALL_EXTENSION_ID) ? Finally, should you not clear the directory first, in the same way repackage-zip currently does? Other than that, r=me for the ChatZilla parts, I suppose... it does not really seem to affect us that much.

(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > We are not changing the name, just using variable defined in > > http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla/source/extensions/irc/locales/Makefile.in#65 > > instead of hardcoding it. The name remains the same. > > > > Well, right. I suppose the more correct phrasing would have been "why are we > changing how we generate it?". I don't really care so much, though. We're not even changing that, actually, we're just using the variable more consistently. > My makefile fu is really non-existant, but can you try to explain why in line > #97 and further, we're referencing > $(STAGEDIST)/extensions/$(INSTALL_EXTENSION_ID) and then in your additions in > this patch, you're using > $(STAGEDIST)/optional/extensions/$(INSTALL_EXTENSION_ID) ? Because those are two vastly different directories for the repackage-zip and repackage-installer cases. If you want the nasty details, you can read suite/locales/Makefile.in (or the same for FF or whatever Mozilla apps use the NSIS installer) :p > Finally, should you not clear the directory first, in the same way > repackage-zip currently does? It should not exist, as the caller (suite/locales/Makefile[.in]) clears the whole $(STAGEDIST), IIRC. > Other than that, r=me for the ChatZilla parts, I suppose... it does not really > seem to affect us that much. No, actually, it only affects apps including ChatZilla in their build and doing L10n repackaging - which is only SeaMonkey, after all ;-)

Comment on attachment 316522 [details] [diff] [review] package CZ langpacks v1 r=me, then

Comment on attachment 316522 [details] [diff] [review] package CZ langpacks v1 Looks good.

patch checked into CVS