Is Ubuntu going to adapt Ice Weasel?
timschmidt at gmail.com
Thu Oct 12 22:43:29 BST 2006
On 10/12/06, Micah Cowan <micah at cowan.name> wrote:
> > Any "instead of firefox" is irrelevant at this point in the discussion,
> > if this happens it's because we *cannot* *distribute* *Firefox*.
> I don't think you're saying what you mean.
> Nobody until now has said anything about Mozilla coming to us and saying
> we can't distribute Firefox. What we've been talking about is Mozilla
> telling us we can't distribute a /version/ of Firefox that has had the
> official logo modified or replaced, or whose code has been modified in
> unapproved ways (either of which would violate the Firefox/Firefox-logo
> trademark license).
> To say that "if this happens it's because we cannot distribute
> Firefox" [exaggerated emphasis removed], is untrue: it is very likely to
> happen at the point where we decide that Firefox may not be distributed
> in *main*. Mozilla will never tell us not to distribute approved copies,
> with logo, name and code intact. AFAIK they /can't/ tell us not to,
> provided we abide by their trademark license and (free) software
Part of distributing software is taking responsibility for security
fixes, bug fixes, and the like. Ubuntu specifically disclaims this
for Universe / Multiverse, and yet still some work is put into those
applications. What MozCorp wants, is for Ubuntu to give up all
control of security fixes, bug fixes, etc. We don't even treat
Multiverse software that poorly. It would mean - at the very least -
kicking firefox out to multiverse and not shipping it on the CD. At
the worst, it would be removed from the repos all together.
More information about the ubuntu-devel