On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Matej Cepl <mcepl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > It would be really helpful if instead of calling programs > "unmaintainable" and similar non-sense you would research a bit what > really is the problem ... take a look at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ > buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem&remaction=run&namedcmd=all%20NEW%20abrt% > 20crashes&sharer_id=74116 ... that's 1473 NEW untriaged abrt bugs. > There is absolutely no permission required. I saw plenty of patches which > were accepted upstream and just few which were rejected with always > clearly stated reasons (not that I agree with all of those reasons, but > again before calling Firefox proprietary product, it would be nice to > educate yourself). > > Concerning CLOSED/UPSTREAM resolution ... again, I am not happy with it > myself, but instead of calling MoFo proprietary a bit of patches (this > time on bugs https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=400598, https:// > bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=294608, https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ > show_bug.cgi?id=356853, and https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi? > id=569371) would be helpful. How is your Perlfoo? See what I wrote on > this theme before (http://article.gmane.org/ > gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel/79936/) and feel free to provide patches > for some better solution of the situation. I can assure you, that well > written patches will be welcomed upstream. > > > Maybe you want to maintain iceweasel & co. in Fedora? Good luck, but not > for me, thanks. At least with iceweasel, those bugs you pointed out can be fixed by Fedora and not have to wait months in the queue over at Mozilla, if they even bother accepting them. Iceweasel would also allow us to use openSUSE's KDE patchset for deep integration, something Mozilla says violates trademark law by patching and distributing. NON FREE -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
