On Sat, Jan 02, 2016 at 03:26:59PM -0800, Kyle Terrien wrote:
> On the other hand, I fully understand why we would want to follow
> upstream--less work for packaging and testing, as well as official
> sanctioning via branding.
It's neither. Mozilla advertises certain level of default security. If Arch is
to reduce that, I think the package will need to be renamed, just not to
mislead unsuspecting users. The expressed concerns have nothing to do with the
branding or maintenance.
Also, if you have specific concerns about the signing procedure, deal with
people @Mozilla. (I don't really care because I don't use any addons.)
Best,
--
Leonid Isaev
GPG fingerprints: DA92 034D B4A8 EC51 7EA6 20DF 9291 EE8A 043C B8C4
C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
