On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Quentin Armitage <Quentin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 12:45 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 13:37:11 -0400, >> Matthias Clasen <mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 10:08 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: >> > >> > > I don't see how using Mozilla trademarks provides significant benefit >> > > to Fedora. It seems to mostly benefit Mozilla. I don't see why we should >> > > be breaking our rules to help them. >> > >> > >> > I think you are grossly misjudging the relative visibility and >> > importance of the Firefox and Fedora brands... nobody knows what Fedora >> > is, while most computer users will have at least heard about Firefox. >> >> Yeah, but "most computer users" isn't relevant. The question is about what >> is relevant to Fedora users. Changing the name of Firefox will have little >> affect on them since it is installed as the default web browser. Being able >> to fix bugs in a timely manner on the other hand, is going to have a >> significant affect on them. > Not a nice idea, but, at least as a temporary workaround, could Fedora > ship both a Firefox and an Iceweasel; Firefox complying with the > trademark rules, and Iceweasel working as users would want it. > > Could the Fedora shipped Firefox even have a home page that says "Have > you tried Iceweasel ..."? And bugs reported against Firefox could be > closed with "Fixed in Iceweasel". That is nonsense ... it just creates confusion and maintenance overhead. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
