howto package extensions

Alex Lancaster alexl at
Mon Jan 7 11:12:55 UTC 2008

On Jan 4, 2008 4:02 AM, Caolan McNamara <caolanm at> wrote:


>>>> to document the best recipe for installing and deinstalling
>>>> extensions


>>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram  writes:

RS> Packaging Committee has instructions on changing the guidelines.

Caolan, do you have any best practices recommendations for the naming
of the extensions?  It would be nice to add them to the
guidelines (then perhaps submit them to the packaging committee) e.g.,
I'd like to package ooolatex:

and so should the package should (following the emacs-, python-,
perl-, R- convention) be called ""?  or should be
called "", or just "ooolatex"?

Also, will this particular extension, which is packaged as an .oxt
file, be able to be installed using the unopkg tool as suggested on
that page?  i.e. are .oxt files intended to be installed using the
unopkg tool?

Any suggestions welcomed.


More information about the devel mailing list