[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Thursday 20 March 2008 11:27, Robin Cornelius wrote: .. >> Thats not Mozillas fault - Debian chose to branch. > > No i disagree here, debian did not choose to branch, debian gives a > certain expected level of security and performance to its users, this > security and ability to act in a timely manor is taken away if you use > the firefox branding. > > Even if all other fixes/patches are removed, not being able to apply > security fixes is a *showstopper* and i would rather have it rebadged > than not have security updates and patches. Yes but I can still run Firefox on my Debian system should I choose to. If they were truly interested in security then NO non deb packages would be allowed. And while I havent actually used iceweasel it must be really irritating to have a browser that disables itself everytime a vulnerability is found. While a security problem in a web browser on M$ can be a showstopper, on a linux box they should not be anything other than an annoyance or do you regularly 'sudo iceweasel'? But they forked - theres no other way of putting it. M$ speak from the FLOSS community is worrying. > > Now if mozilla were "switched on" about this in the first place they > could have created a (2nd) brand that could have been used and > identified as a "modified firefox" but with out trademark restrictions > then it would be clear which version you were using and keep brand > forking to a minimum that was common. I run 3 different versions of Firefox - which one do you want rebranding? Tom te tom te tom -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html