Kevin Kofler wrote:
Arthur Pemberton <pemboa <at> gmail.com> writes:
Sorry to jump in here. But from what I've read, it seems that MozCo is
cool with Fedora as things stand.
But for how long? I think the patch approval process can also be a constraint
on the Fedora Legacy team. Currently, Legacy is simply upgrading rather than
backporting, and even working on packaging Seamonkey to replace the
discontinued Mozilla Suite for the older distros (that gratuitous name change
is also due to Mozilla's trademark policies, by the way),
No, it's not. Seamonkey's name is rather irrelevant. It's really a
different product. Not maintained by the same people, it's a fork of
the old project. See what happened with galeon and epiphany. Same
browser, same original author, different name.
Firefox's stringent trademarking policies became born because the
Mozilla trademark became diluted. You even see it in Internet
Explorer's User Agent string. The Mozilla trademark was long since
"lost" so to speak.
but what if they want
to work together with the Debian stable people on backporting fixes instead? I
don't think being shackled by a restrictive trademark agreement is what Free
Software is about.
The question people are asking seems to be directed on what if Mozilla
doesn't agree with us? But the real question everyone *should* be
asking is what if *we* don't agree with *them*? Because until that
time, we have no reason to worry about this.
With the rate of how quickly security fixes are turned around and the
complexity of them, you'd need a team of many people to get patches out
in a timely manner for all past releases, and produce quality patches.
I'm really not sure how Debian is going to handle the one large mega
security patch that took Brendan and jst (Chief Architect and Senior
Architect) two+ months to patch plus over 10 regressions. I see no good
reason to *want* to not take new releases wholesale at this time. As
long as we're selective about the releases we take. (E.g. take 1.5.0.x
NOT the RC for now simply for maintenance purposes).
Also, do you like how Mozilla is using this as an argument to pressure Debian
into compliance? "See, Fedora does what we want, why don't you?" I think this
places Fedora entirely on the wrong side of the fence.
Fedora does what Fedora wants. I've pushed for new releases because I
can't possibly keep up with the security backporting. See above. The
fact that I want to meet their needs at this time is a coincidence.
Yay, you get sexy branding. Enjoy.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
