You are not logged in.

#51 2006-10-02 10:31:56

Lone_Wolf
Member
From: Netherlands, Europe
Registered: 2005-10-04
Posts: 4,318

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

'm not concerned about the name. I don't care what exact name will be. Razz
Of course new name won't change anything. It will be the same Firefox with patches from Arch devs, as always.

I agree. Changing name and logo imo will help to keep Mozilla people happy and AL out of trouble.


Booting with apg Openrc, NOT systemd.
Automounting : not needed, i prefer pmount
Aur helpers : makepkg + my own local repo === rarely need them

Offline

#52 2006-10-02 12:47:40

skottish
Forum Fellow
From: Here
Registered: 2006-06-16
Posts: 7,931

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

Romashka wrote:

Now they are preparing 2.0 'mega-next-gen-release' which brings almost nothing new to be called 2.0.

Nothing new? It has a permanent Google talk back engine built into it. The worlds largest ad-ware company now has tracking software built into Firefox. I call that new.

Offline

#53 2006-10-02 13:05:14

allucid
Member
Registered: 2006-01-06
Posts: 259

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

skottish wrote:
Romashka wrote:

Now they are preparing 2.0 'mega-next-gen-release' which brings almost nothing new to be called 2.0.

Nothing new? It has a permanent Google talk back engine built into it. The worlds largest ad-ware company now has tracking software built into Firefox. I call that new.

Are you talking about the tie-in to Google's anti-phishing service? They use the official google API and it looks fairly harmless. There has been a big push for browsers to have some kind of anti-phishing capabilities built in.

Offline

#54 2006-10-02 13:15:38

iphitus
Forum Fellow
From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2004-10-09
Posts: 4,927

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

skottish wrote:
Romashka wrote:

Now they are preparing 2.0 'mega-next-gen-release' which brings almost nothing new to be called 2.0.

Nothing new? It has a permanent Google talk back engine built into it. The worlds largest ad-ware company now has tracking software built into Firefox. I call that new.

wheeeee! hyperbolae! don't see how Google are an adware company, I can't think of any software they release containing ads. Websites dont count.

If it were a google talk back engine, and it had no method of disabling, I think we would have heard more. After all, Firefox is open source, so there's always a way to turn it off.

James

Offline

#55 2006-10-02 15:10:15

brazzmonkey
Member
From: between keyboard and chair
Registered: 2006-03-16
Posts: 818
Website

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

why use mozilla's stuff when there is much better available ??


what goes up must come down

Offline

#56 2006-10-02 16:00:47

hehejo_
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2005-10-08
Posts: 47
Website

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

brazzmonkey wrote:

why use mozilla's stuff when there is much better available ??

List the alternatives and if there's a package for ArchLinux.

Offline

#57 2006-10-02 16:21:48

brazzmonkey
Member
From: between keyboard and chair
Registered: 2006-03-16
Posts: 818
Website

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

for web browsing : konqueror, epiphany, opera...
email client : kmail, evolution, sylpheed...

all of them are available trough arch.
i never liked thunderbird, and now kmail is very good. i used to use firefox but got bored of the way it renders some web pages + its general slowliness. konqueror does the job just fine. i only miss some (very few and barely used) extensions.

only a matter of 1) taste 2) trying something _slightly_ diferrent and changing a few habits.


what goes up must come down

Offline

#58 2006-10-02 17:15:08

hehejo_
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2005-10-08
Posts: 47
Website

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

I like thunderbird very much. And firefox renders nicer as opera (in my eyes).

But - why not wget the source and css and render by myself?

Offline

#59 2006-10-02 17:43:29

iBertus
Member
From: Greenville, NC
Registered: 2004-11-04
Posts: 2,228

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

brazzmonkey wrote:

for web browsing : konqueror, epiphany, opera...

1. KDE deps
2. GNOME deps
3. closed-source


Also, Epiphany is based on gecko, which is a mozilla product.

Offline

#60 2006-10-02 17:58:50

fk
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2006-04-29
Posts: 524

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

iBertus wrote:
brazzmonkey wrote:

for web browsing : konqueror, epiphany, opera...

1. KDE deps
2. GNOME deps
3. closed-source


Also, Epiphany is based on gecko, which is a mozilla product.

do you know another good Browser who is not closed source and have no KDE/GNOME Deps?


Have you tried to turn it off and on again?

Offline

#61 2006-10-02 17:59:38

archuser
Member
From: Northamptonshire, UK
Registered: 2006-09-10
Posts: 122

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

I know all this about firefox is perhaps a drawback but how does it really affect Arch?

What do these patches do and is it that big a deal to get them approved by mozilla first?

Secondly would there not be a legal loophole for us that we could put the unpatched firefox in current and have the patches in community or something?


Intel i7-920 (stock), ASUS P6TD-Deluxe, AMD R9 270X, RAM: 6GB

Offline

#62 2006-10-02 18:02:16

iBertus
Member
From: Greenville, NC
Registered: 2004-11-04
Posts: 2,228

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

fk wrote:

do you know another good Browser who is not closed source and have no KDE/GNOME Deps?

Sadly, no. Maybe dillo, but it isn't as functional as all these browsers.

Offline

#63 2006-10-02 18:04:56

iBertus
Member
From: Greenville, NC
Registered: 2004-11-04
Posts: 2,228

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

archuser wrote:

I know all this about firefox is perhaps a drawback but how does it really affect Arch?

What do these patches do and is it that big a deal to get them approved by mozilla first?

Secondly would there not be a legal loophole for us that we could put the unpatched firefox in current and have the patches in community or something?

I think you cannot just GET approval from Mozilla. It seems they are quite selective about what patches are approved. It also adds a new step to EACH new update to the firefox package. The simple solution is to just not using the firefox branding. I don't see why the branding is all that important to us (this is not Red Hat) using Arch Linux. If this was a commercial distro trying to sell a desktop product, we may want 'offical' for our distro.

Offline

#64 2006-10-02 18:05:09

arooaroo
Member
From: London, UK
Registered: 2005-01-13
Posts: 1,268
Website

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

Let's not get in to a complete tiz over the trademarks. Let's not forget about KDE(tm), GNOME(tm) and, gasp, Linux(tm) to name but three.

The browser market is clearly competitive in that all non-MS developers not only have to make a superior product (which they all generally do) but have to convert the mindsets of many users already familiar with something else, i.e., something a bit pants.

Mozilla is currently the only hope in giving IE some competition. I personally think it was a massive factor in IE7 not being just IE6+security patches. But let's not forget, Firefox is 100% open source! That's what FSF and all the OSI licenses are about: freeing the source. It's not about giving anyone control of the original product. It's not about doing what the OSS community wants, etc.

It makes perfect sense to protect themselves. If I patch Firefox, then I've created a deriviative work - it doesn't matter whether I've just merged a super-patch that makes it run 100% faster, be 100% secure or whatever. It's fair to assume that Firefox devs would eventually incorporate patches that make a positive impact in to their main source branch. However, until that point, that patched version is a fork and must be treated as such. It's also right to respect the requirements of the license that is letting you patch the source and redistribute.

Anyway, I'm off to create an ArchLinux fork. I think i'll switch to RPMs for starters. I think I'll remove pacman's dependency resolution. Might recompile everything under i386 to remove those i686 optimisations. Oh, but I think i'll still call it Arch Linux. That's ok, right? wink

Offline

#65 2006-10-02 18:12:57

iBertus
Member
From: Greenville, NC
Registered: 2004-11-04
Posts: 2,228

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

@arooaroo: amen, i suppose. big_smile

I agree with this logic. As I stated above: why concern ourselves with branding. We could have an offical, unpatched firefox package and also a patched one. Say, mozilla-firefox and arch-browser (not a good name but you get the point) with which we could cannabalize/bastardize to our hearts content.

Offline

#66 2006-10-02 19:31:10

dogfin
Member
From: WA, USA
Registered: 2006-04-04
Posts: 10

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

fk wrote:
iBertus wrote:
brazzmonkey wrote:

for web browsing : konqueror, epiphany, opera...

1. KDE deps
2. GNOME deps
3. closed-source


Also, Epiphany is based on gecko, which is a mozilla product.

do you know another good Browser who is not closed source and have no KDE/GNOME Deps?

Lynx FTW.


dogfin -

Offline

#67 2006-10-02 19:56:08

iBertus
Member
From: Greenville, NC
Registered: 2004-11-04
Posts: 2,228

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

dogfin wrote:

Lynx FTW.

Not practical for everyday usage. Lynx works fine for console-only systems or for working out of X, but lacks features that most want in a browser.

Offline

#68 2006-10-03 07:51:25

Romashka
Forum Fellow
Registered: 2005-12-07
Posts: 1,054

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

iBertus wrote:
fk wrote:

do you know another good Browser who is not closed source and have no KDE/GNOME Deps?

Sadly, no. Maybe dillo, but it isn't as functional as all these browsers.

Dillo has poor rendering engine, and I don't think it will improve much.
There is Gecko-based GTK2-only Kazehakase -  it has not very good UI IMHO, but it works.
There is also GTK+ WebCore Project and few experimental browsers, for example Atlantis. Hovewer this project is not actively developed now.

I think all these are enought for browsing, if you don't want some fancy features, plugins etc.

Anyway most users have either GNOME or KDE libs installed, so I don't see the problem in using Epiphany or Konqueror for most of them.


to live is to die

Offline

#69 2006-10-03 07:58:28

Romashka
Forum Fellow
Registered: 2005-12-07
Posts: 1,054

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

arooaroo wrote:

It makes perfect sense to protect themselves. If I patch Firefox, then I've created a deriviative work - it doesn't matter whether I've just merged a super-patch that makes it run 100% faster, be 100% secure or whatever. It's fair to assume that Firefox devs would eventually incorporate patches that make a positive impact in to their main source branch. However, until that point, that patched version is a fork and must be treated as such. It's also right to respect the requirements of the license that is letting you patch the source and redistribute.

You do realize that patching and forking are different things?  wink


to live is to die

Offline

#70 2006-10-03 18:50:42

arooaroo
Member
From: London, UK
Registered: 2005-01-13
Posts: 1,268
Website

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

Romashka wrote:

You do realize that patching and forking are different things?  wink

To the intents and purposes, they are the same thing. The motives may differ but ultimately they are both derivative works. A patched Firefox is not Firefox, nor is a forked Firefox.

Offline

#71 2006-10-03 19:10:10

Romashka
Forum Fellow
Registered: 2005-12-07
Posts: 1,054

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

arooaroo wrote:
Romashka wrote:

You do realize that patching and forking are different things?  wink

To the intents and purposes, they are the same thing. The motives may differ but ultimately they are both derivative works. A patched Firefox is not Firefox, nor is a forked Firefox.

This is much better formulation. I agree.


to live is to die

Offline

#72 2006-10-09 17:52:59

Romashka
Forum Fellow
Registered: 2005-12-07
Posts: 1,054

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

So, new names are chosen.
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=25872

BTW, here is the bug report with all messages of MoCo-Debian conflict: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepor … bug=354622


to live is to die

Offline

#73 2006-10-19 20:34:27

con
Member
Registered: 2006-05-11
Posts: 89
Website

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

From the GPL preamble...

We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the software.

Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free software. If the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors' reputations.

..the way I see it is even RMS approves of MozCorp's actions...


charlie dont surf!

Offline

#74 2006-10-24 12:15:46

PJ
Member
From: Sweden
Registered: 2005-10-11
Posts: 602

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

I am not sure if you have read this, but I think it contains some interesting information.
http://times.debian.net/1022-iceweasel

Offline

#75 2006-10-24 13:38:18

luke
Member
From: US
Registered: 2004-06-22
Posts: 54

Re: Debian To Rebrand Firefox - Does this affect archlinux ?

It makes perfect sense to protect themselves. If I patch Firefox, ...

I just wanted to say that arooaroo is my hero (for summing up my thoughts perfectly and thus saving me time), and that this:

We could have an offical, unpatched firefox package and also a patched one. Say, mozilla-firefox and arch-browser (not a good name but you get the point) with which we could cannabalize/bastardize to our hearts content.

seems like a great way for Arch to handle the issue, IF any changed need to be made at all.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB