On 01/07/2016 04:19 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 01/07/2016 09:46 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 08:33:37AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 8:29 AM, Naheem Zaffar
<naheemzaffar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
ESR will only delay the problem.
Can the Fedora build add a secodary key to accept signed
extensions?
This is one of the suggested solutions, but it is not currently
implemented upstream.
AFAIK the long term plan is todeprecate the current method of
extensions in favour of a more browser agnostic approach.
Correct.
Is it just me, or does it seem odd to take Mozilla to task for
doing something with their (relatively much larger) ecosystem we
also endeavor to do with Fedora's?
Could you explain what you mean? Mozilla's intent is lock-in: they're
providing exactly one source from which you can retrieve extensions.
With Fedora, we do signature signing for trust reasons, but you are
always offered a way to bypass that (or add your own keys, etc.)
I'm sure you're wrong here. lock-in means you can't change your
software. How is it related here? How are you locked and by what? You
can use the unbranded Firefox with your own extension without any
limitations.
--
desktop mailing list
desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
