On 10/3/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 07:47:59 +0200, Carlo Calica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Nah. XFree86 was stagnating for awhile before the fork. X
> > > development exploded after the fork which is why no one (
On 10/3/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Carlo Calica" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is this a real issue, ie is mozilla.org slow with bug fixes? And are
> > these bug fixes available elsewhere?
>
> I have found mozilla.org to be slow to apply bug fixes in the past,
> particularly when th
Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 07:47:59 +0200, Carlo Calica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Nah. XFree86 was stagnating for awhile before the fork. X
> > development exploded after the fork which is why no one (almost) uses
> > XFree86 anymore.
>
> That's not what
"Carlo Calica" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is this a real issue, ie is mozilla.org slow with bug fixes? And are
> these bug fixes available elsewhere?
I have found mozilla.org to be slow to apply bug fixes in the past,
particularly when they only affect Unix-like platforms (something to do
wit
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 07:47:59 +0200, Carlo Calica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/2/06, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I suggest that we wait for Debian to settle on something and that we
>> follow their lead. My guess is that more distributions will follow
>> sooner
>> or later.
On 10/2/06, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I suggest that we wait for Debian to settle on something and that we
> follow their lead. My guess is that more distributions will follow sooner
> or later.
I vote for having both. More choice is good. Debating the selection
criteria for th
On 10/2/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Carlo Calica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 9/29/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > My fear is that any bugfix going into gobolinux will block on MozCorp
> > > approval, which is simply unethical when we can do better.
> >
> > I'm not sure
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 16:40:11 +0200, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On a plus side, [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me about www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla
> -
> would we be better off using/helping the mythical IceWeasel instead?
> Or should it be available as an alternative?
>
The question of the Mo
Carlo Calica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/29/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My fear is that any bugfix going into gobolinux will block on MozCorp
> > approval, which is simply unethical when we can do better.
>
> I'm not sure that is a practical concern. Who's creating these Gobo
>
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 16:40:11 +0200, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [...] If we at GoboLinux has a patch that isn't already
>> submitted by any of the large distro with rights to redistribute we have
>> to submit it for review before we include it i
On 9/29/06, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My fear is that any bugfix going into gobolinux will block on MozCorp
> approval, which is simply unethical when we can do better.
>
I'm not sure that is a practical concern. Who's creating these Gobo
specific bugfixes. Firefox has a strong brand
Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] If we at GoboLinux has a patch that isn't already
> submitted by any of the large distro with rights to redistribute we have
> to submit it for review before we include it in our releases (if we want
> to call the browser Firefox), but to me t
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 12:53:52 +0200, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please do not rely on Wikipedia! Any idiot can edit it and many do.
>
I wasn't relying on the quote, but more on the reference attached to it.
But as you later state Gerv has nothing to do with the licensing any more.
> The
Please do not rely on Wikipedia! Any idiot can edit it and many do.
The most recent thing I have seen about Firefox's trademark is
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=354622 which
also suggests Gerv is no longer relevant.
Even if we can call it Firefox now (hurrah! but would it limi
Reading the Wikipedia page about Mozilla Firefox, I found this:
"Although Firefox uses open source core software, free licensing does not
extend to the artwork. For this reason, software distributors who
distribute patched or modified versions of Firefox cannot use the Firefox
icon. However,
15 matches
Mail list logo
