Re: libre version of iceweasel

[Mike Hommey]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:42:19AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:40:45AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On Jun 09, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton  wrote:
> > 
> > > open question: is there a perceived need to dig into the source code
> > > of firefox and, just as was done with google-chrome to create
> > > chromium-browser, permanently patch out certain "features"?
> > No: I am a grown up and I can choose by myself which features of 
> > a software I want to use. No nanny maintainers, please.
> 
> This question is not about features, but about the fact that this
> effectively incorporates something as default which would otherwise be
> frowned upon for something in Debian's "main" repository. "Pocket" is a
> non-free service.
>
> Having said that, we do have other packages in main which talk to a
> non-free service; e.g., there's some facebookchat plugin for some chat
> programs (I forgot which). This is no different.
>
> So while I understand Luke's concern, given Debian's current practices
> there is no reason to reject this functionality.

And even without looking at other packages, iceweasel has had a search
box for years, which defaults to using Google, which is a non-free
service as well, and so are the alternatives that are provided,
including Yahoo, Bing, Amazon and even DDG that many free-software
supporters like to pride themselves of using (although a few parts of
DDG are open-source-y now).

Mike


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150610095635.ga29...@glandium.org

Re: libre version of iceweasel

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:40:45AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jun 09, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton  wrote:
> 
> > open question: is there a perceived need to dig into the source code
> > of firefox and, just as was done with google-chrome to create
> > chromium-browser, permanently patch out certain "features"?
> No: I am a grown up and I can choose by myself which features of 
> a software I want to use. No nanny maintainers, please.

This question is not about features, but about the fact that this
effectively incorporates something as default which would otherwise be
frowned upon for something in Debian's "main" repository. "Pocket" is a
non-free service.

Having said that, we do have other packages in main which talk to a
non-free service; e.g., there's some facebookchat plugin for some chat
programs (I forgot which). This is no different.

So while I understand Luke's concern, given Debian's current practices
there is no reason to reject this functionality.

-- 
It is easy to love a country that is famous for chocolate and beer

  -- Barack Obama, speaking in Brussels, Belgium, 2014-03-26


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: libre version of iceweasel

[Jack Hill]

On Tue, 9 Jun 2015, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:


open question: is there a perceived need to dig into the source code
of firefox and, just as was done with google-chrome to create
chromium-browser, permanently patch out certain "features"?


There is GNU IceCat , although I 
don't think it's packaged for Debian.


Best,
Jack


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.02.1506092144150.6...@bog.hcoop.net

Re: libre version of iceweasel

[Marco d'Itri]

On Jun 09, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton  wrote:

> open question: is there a perceived need to dig into the source code
> of firefox and, just as was done with google-chrome to create
> chromium-browser, permanently patch out certain "features"?
No: I am a grown up and I can choose by myself which features of 
a software I want to use. No nanny maintainers, please.

-- 
ciao,
Marco


pgpvpIC0A_G6Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature

libre version of iceweasel

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/06/09/1722236/mozilla-responds-to-firefox-user-backlash-over-pocket-integration

after seeing this, i'm becoming increasingly alarmed at where firefox
is going [the first signs were the way in which the announcement was
made to focus on "speed improvements" when chrome and webkit first
became popular]

open question: is there a perceived need to dig into the source code
of firefox and, just as was done with google-chrome to create
chromium-browser, permanently patch out certain "features"?

l.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/CAPweEDwH=pvRP=rwni6mgbhvp1a0jw0wqk4vgdcsznqhap_...@mail.gmail.com