On Tue 27 July 2010 16:46:29 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 07/28/2010 05:09 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote: > > On 07/28/2010 12:49 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> Non upstreamed patches are not a option for > >> > >> Firefox for trademark reasons as well. > > > > Non upstreamed patches are not an option because it's a pain in the to > > have to update patches every few weeks for a new FF release. We > > either can do patches or take new releases, doing both is just a > > maintenance nightmare. Since Fedora is all about doing stuff > > upstream, it sorts itself out better that way. > > Well yes. Trademark is not the only reason obviously but I don't want > to deviate the discussion more. Is Firefox 4 being considered for > Fedora 14 or not? I'd be really bothered with shipping (beta) software where we are more or less at the mercy of our upstream wrt possible issues, bugs, etc. Yes, yes, yes, I'm probably going to get flamed for that, it's mozilla, we need to work with upstream, etc, etc, but would we put other (arguably) crit-path in this position, especially at GA? I'm all for Firefox 4, but shipping a Beta in which we are limited in what patches we can ship, this late in the release cycle, it just really bothers me. > Rahul Ryan -- Ryan Rix == http://hackersramblings.wordpress.com | http://rix.si/ == == http://rix.si/page/contact/ if you need a word ==
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
