Honestly, what makes something like Opera or Konqueror 'better' than Firefox? I've tried Opera once, and the K a few times, and didn't really see what the big difference was. I hardly think Firefox is bloated, or "IE-like". It does everything I want it to and does not insist on doing what I don't, though the memory is a bit much. Opera seemed exactly the same, albeit with a different setup.
By the way, I checked out this 2.0 release, and I can see myself sticking to 1.x as long as I can.
@arooaroo: amen, i suppose.
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.
good idea, the patched one could maybe be named Alifox or Archox
and someone could create a nice logo/icon
@arooaroo: I also applaud you for your insight and saving me the time to convey this same idea.
What would be the problem (save time) for having both an "official" Firefox package and a non-official package?
people would complain about the non patched one, and ask "why is arch's firefox so broken?" -- not realising we have a nice patched up completely differently named browser.
There's a lot of patches there, each fixing various bugs, and problems encountered with arch and firefox.
I don't see any fair reason to justify creating a second package, just because of branding. Applications exist to perform a task. Firefox will continue to perform the task you require of it, just as aptly irrelevant of whatever branding it has.
For the handful that do want it, it's quite simple to use ABS and enable it -- and that's a better solution than distributing a buggy build in our repositories.
do you know another good Browser who is not closed source and have no KDE/GNOME Deps?
Well, theres always <a href="http://www.konqueror.org/embedded/">Konqueror embedded</a>.
Seriously tho, i think Arch should skip the "Bon Echo"-gibberish (c'mon, what is that?) and go to <a href="http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/">IceWeasel</a> ^^
All in all, you really can't complain about it while looking at it from a business standpoint. Mozilla is just trying to save their own backsides. I wrote something about this in another post regarding the renaming of Firefox and such like that. I'm not saying I support their reasons, but I do see where they are coming from.
So do I. So lets humor them, and distribute IceWeasel and Gnuzilla instead of Firefox and Mozilla Suite.