FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-25-2010, 09:48 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> Isn't this a FESCO issue? Maybe it is time to reopen this issue?

Knowing my fellow FESCo members, I don't think I'll get a majority to agree
with me. :-(

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-25-2010, 09:58 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

Mail Lists wrote:
> If it was fedora branded then I'd guess a goodly chunk would just go
> and install the upstream anyway coz they would not know nor trust the
> browser called 'Fedora-Browser' or whatever.
>
> Those wishing to use firefox will use firefox - those wishing to use
> google-chrome will use it (in spite of chromium sounding similar by the
> by, it was far less functional).
>
> To be honest - i had never heard of iceweasel (yeh I get the name now)
> until this thread .. but I sure have heard of firefox/thunderbird.

If we use the same name as Debian and get the press to publish articles with
headlines like "Iceweasel is the Linux Firefox" (we don't have to worry
about trademark issues with such a statement if THEY do it for us :-p), that
might help.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-25-2010, 10:21 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

Chris Tyler wrote:
> Wait, let's not get silly here.
>
> Fedora has a great relationship with Mozilla. They're an amazing project
> filled with people that Get It, and we can work out issues with them in
> a cooperative way.

I'm fed up of the "they're great, so let's do all they want" rhetoric. No
matter how nice the other guys are, if what they do conflicts with our
ideals and they aren't flexible enough to change this, we CANNOT work with
them.

I strongly disagree about them "Getting It". They're the ONLY Free Software
upstream insane enough to require approval for EVERY SINGLE patch as a
condition to use their trademark. Imagine if Linus Torvalds did that for the
kernel Linux, or the GNOME and/or KDE developers for their desktop
environments. It would be impossible to maintain a distro under such
conditions! Why does Mozilla get that sort of preferential treatment?

Even some copyright holders who previously enforced this kind of
restrictions in their copyright licenses, e.g. DJB and the UW (PINE), have
seen that patch approval requirements are a major roadblock and made their
software Free Software. So why does Mozilla have to use trademarks to
restrict the freeness of their software?

I also think Mozilla doesn't "Get It" in several other ways. System
integration on GNU/Linux is generally an afterthought and moves very slowly,
e.g. it has taken years to get Firefox to use system icons, and I have no
idea when or even if openSUSE's KDE integration will be merged. Firefox is
set up to send all the URLs you consult to Google by default, which also
means you have to manually disable the relevant settings (which don't even
say anywhere in the dialog that they send all your browsing data to Google!)
if you don't agree with the ToS for Google's anti-phishing service. They
forked libpng to add support for the nonstandard "APNG" extension they added
despite the explicit opposition of the PNG group, bundle that forked version
and don't support building against a system libpng without their patch; they
removed support for the official MNG format which serves the same purpose
for bogus reasons, probably ensuring that no animated PNG format will ever
reach critical mass (which is quite sad considering the obsolescence of GIF,
and which might even contribute to spreading proprietary crap such as
Flash).

> Consider:
>
> * Mozilla is currently implementing unit tests *on Fedora* in addition
> to their long-standing tests on CentOS. This benefits both communities.

So what? That has nothing to do with the issues at hand.

> * Mozilla's brands are very well-known: They have 350+ million users
> across multiple platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux), far more than we have
> in Fedora. The ability to use these apps in Fedora helps to assures new
> users that switching costs will be low.

Whether it's called "Firefox" or "Iceweasel" or "Water Buffalo" or whatever
doesn't change how it works at all.

> * The trademark rules are there for a reason. Browser and e-mail clients
> are some of the most common attack points on desktop systems, and
> Mozilla needs to ensure that they don't get a black eye for some
> vulnerability introduced by a distro.

LOL, now that's a funny excuse! They should start fixing their own
vulnerabilities, they have at least an order of magnitude more security
issues than Konqueror. For each one they fix, a new one pops up somewhere
else.

And in addition, this is not a problem for the kernel Linux, for GNOME
(including Epiphany and Evolution), for KDE (including Konqueror and KMail)
and many other software, so why would this be a problem for Mozilla?

> And distros definitely introduce vulnerabilities: think about the Debian
> ssh-keygen patch fiasco as an example.

That was an isolated case. Extrapolating from that that distros introduce
vulnerabilities in all the software they patch is quite silly.

> We wouldn't do something so rash, of course -- or would we? The suggestion
> earlier in this thread that we patch TB and push directly to stable does
> not instill confidence.

Well, it depends on how complicated the patch is. If it's rather trivial and
if the problem is important (which it is), I think pushing it out as fast as
possible is the right thing to do. If the patch is more complex, it needs
some testing.

> Let's not be brash. If we want to ship TB with one small patch, it's a
> simple matter of asking.

Then let's ask, NOW, so we can get that crasher finally fixed!

But that still doesn't fix the underlying issue in the long run.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-25-2010, 10:37 PM
Mail Lists
 
Default Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

On 04/25/2010 06:21 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:


Can someone explain why the fedora version has a bug which upstream
version does not ? Or am I missing something ?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-25-2010, 10:39 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

Chris Tyler wrote:

> On Mon, 2010-04-26 at 00:33 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> What about patches to use system libraries?
>
> I'm sure they'd love to receive 'em!

http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/view/xulrunner/1.9.2.3-2/debian-hacks/0011-Disable-APNG-support-when-system-libpng-doesn-t-supp.patch
http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/view/xulrunner/1.9.2.3-2/debian-hacks/0039-Allow-to-build-against-system-libffi.patch

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-25-2010, 11:17 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

Mail Lists wrote:
> Can someone explain why the fedora version has a bug which upstream
> version does not ? Or am I missing something ?

The upstream version has that bug too, they just don't care about it enough
to release a fixed version in a timely manner.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-25-2010, 11:56 PM
Mail Lists
 
Default Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

On 04/25/2010 07:17 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> The upstream version has that bug too, they just don't care about it enough
> to release a fixed version in a timely manner.


OH - FYI, I am running upstream and I don't have that problem ... can
disconnect the network all i want .. no crash.



--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-26-2010, 08:05 AM
Quentin Armitage
 
Default Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 12:45 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 13:37:11 -0400,
> Matthias Clasen <mclasen@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 10:08 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> >
> > > I don't see how using Mozilla trademarks provides significant benefit
> > > to Fedora. It seems to mostly benefit Mozilla. I don't see why we should
> > > be breaking our rules to help them.
> >
> >
> > I think you are grossly misjudging the relative visibility and
> > importance of the Firefox and Fedora brands... nobody knows what Fedora
> > is, while most computer users will have at least heard about Firefox.
>
> Yeah, but "most computer users" isn't relevant. The question is about what
> is relevant to Fedora users. Changing the name of Firefox will have little
> affect on them since it is installed as the default web browser. Being able
> to fix bugs in a timely manner on the other hand, is going to have a
> significant affect on them.
Not a nice idea, but, at least as a temporary workaround, could Fedora
ship both a Firefox and an Iceweasel; Firefox complying with the
trademark rules, and Iceweasel working as users would want it.

Could the Fedora shipped Firefox even have a home page that says "Have
you tried Iceweasel ..."? And bugs reported against Firefox could be
closed with "Fixed in Iceweasel".

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-26-2010, 08:36 AM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

On 04/25/2010 07:37 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 10:08 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>
>> I don't see how using Mozilla trademarks provides significant benefit
>> to Fedora. It seems to mostly benefit Mozilla. I don't see why we should
>> be breaking our rules to help them.
>
>
> I think you are grossly misjudging the relative visibility and
> importance of the Firefox and Fedora brands... nobody knows what Fedora
> is, while most computer users will have at least heard about Firefox.

Does this justify Fedora throwing the principles of "Free SW" over board?

IMO, *no* - it's time to spread the world about Mozilla's trademark
policy violating the prinicples of Free SW and Fedora's Mozilla being
hostage of it.

In other words, if Fedora hasn't already entirely abandoned the original
motivations and foundations it once was based on, it's time for Fedora
to very serously reconsider their attitude on Mozilla packages.


Ralf


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-26-2010, 08:41 AM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default Thunderbird bz 579023 still not fixed even though there is an upstream fix available

On 04/25/2010 11:48 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>> Isn't this a FESCO issue? Maybe it is time to reopen this issue?
>
> Knowing my fellow FESCo members, I don't think I'll get a majority to agree
> with me. :-(

Well, may-be FESCO should decide upon on whether the FSF's
"freedom 3" [1] is a inclusion/exclusion criterion for packages in Fedora.

Ralf

[1] http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:42 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org