On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 16:28:23 +0200, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > Is not upstream, Mozilla in this case, Gnome for shell extensions, > Google for Androids apps. etc responsible for conducting security > auditing on extensions/addons they host/provide upstream? One could automatically trust in Fedora to Mozilla plugins only if it's licensing and reviewing requirements are equal or are subset the Fedora one's. I do not see the requirements for a Mozilla plugin acceptance - as it does not even have to be "open-source" (whatever that means) it just cannot comply with the Fedora requirements. > And another thing why do we want to package something that works out > of the box for the end user Upstream unreviewed binary blobs in no way work for me as a user. Regards, Jan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
