Will Firefox no longer be named Firefox?
ze4lot at gmail.com
Tue Sep 26 22:45:49 BST 2006
Paul Marshall wrote:
> Ah, that makes more sense. Again, I have to apologize for my
newness, but could someone point me to some conversations, or inform me,
as to why firefox is patched to turn autoupdate off.
Hi there, I'm new here, too; I'm following this mailing list since may,
though. By the way, hello everybody!
> My initial email still stands for #2 -- why wouldn't someone
(including ubuntu developers) with a security patch work directly with
the moz foundation?
> The last two make sense for the problem at hand. But then I would
side with some earlier suggestions, if firefox is tweaked ("patched")
for ubuntu (and in a manner that the moz foundation doesn't approve)
then it should be called *some-other-name*, but wouldn't it be possible
to include firefox (defaults and all) as well? Then the user would just
have more options for browsers...I suppose a downside of this is that
you're essentially taking up 2x the space for the same thing, the same
A modest proposal (based on Paul's one): how about having a common
package (i.e. firefox-common) and two (or more) packages for Mozilla
Firefox and Ubuntu Firefox? This way we will not have the downside that
Paul has highlighted.. no waste of space and freedom of choiche.. (with
a somewhat interesting confusion for the user. Maybe a "tip" on the
first logon that says something like "Looking for Mozilla Firefox? Try
'Still to be named' browser! It is based on Firefox blabla"..). If
things won't cool down, this could be a solution.
More information about the ubuntu-devel