Re: Bittorrent licensing, take 2 [MPL and Jabber inside]

[Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org>]

MJ Ray wrote:
> I had hoped that a Moz Found rep would tell us we've missed some
> obvious reason this doesn't hurt debian, but not yet. 

With regard to the "six months" requirement, does it help to point out 
that CVS and other source control systems are Electronic Distribution 
Mechanisms? Therefore, as long as whatever system Debian keeps its 
Mozilla modifications in is versioned and publically available, you 
aren't failing to meet the requirement.

> It might
> be overload, 

It is overload.

> as basic questions from 11 Feb are unanswered yet:
> can Gerv (or someone else, hey ho) tell us the opinions of the
> wider Mozilla team about debian's package names, please? 

I think I've already given them - we'd prefer that they be "firefox" and 
"thunderbird" rather than "mozilla-firefox" and "mozilla-thunderbird". 
Opinions differ on whether this is something we can legally require :-).

> When
> can we expect iceweasel/FireWeb (or whatever white label browser)
> will be buildable from upstream sources?

We are working on it, but I can't give an ETA.

Gerv