On Sun, 2007-01-28 at 21:38 -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> On Sunday 28 January 2007 18:33, Paul Johnson wrote:
> ...
> > > Do you see a difference?
> >
> > You could have cancelled and looked into why that is. iceweasel
> > provides firefox because it *is* firefox. There is no functional
> > difference between firefox and iceweasel. You're making a mountain
> > out of a molehill.
>
> Here's the part I don't get. Even though I'm making a living as a
> programmer, I'm self taught and have missed a lot -- and I don't know C
> or C++. I've tried to make sense of the listing of what was taken out
> of Firefox to make Iceweasel, yet I found it hard to follow.
>
> Just what was taken out as non-free if it doesn't effect functionality?
> If it doesn't make a difference, why is it in there? Or have all the
> non-free things been replaced by free code already?
The whole thing comes down to this.
Previously, the LOGO was never included with what was called Firefox in
Mozilla, as it was argued (incessantly on Debian Devel and on Debian
Legal). It was finally found that the Logo restrictions the Mozilla
Foundation had put on it was non-DFSG compliant. But the package was
still called Firefox in Debian. The Mozilla Foundation formerly gave
Debian an Exception to Distribute the package that way.
Early last year (or maybe a bit before that) The Mozilla Foundation
Declared that the Firefox package in Debian WAS NOT Mozilla Foundation
Blessed anymore. It was required that Debian make it "Mozilla Foundation
Sources" with the official Logo in it and be the source MUST NOT BE
CHANGED beyond compile time changes. TO get changes in the source, and
still be called Firefox, they had to be submitted to the "Mozilla
Foundation" choosing to either include it or not. Delaying any "Security
or bug" fixes possibly forever for Debian. This then compromised
Debian's autonomy to provide its support for its own Distribution... or
at best hamstrung it.
They only way to fix this issue was to:
1. Get the Mozilla Foundation to compromise on its stance, allowing
quid-pro-quo from before, They said it'll never happen, ever.
They were "protecting" the Firefox Branding
2. Get Debian to compromise, making exceptions to its policy on
DFSG. Thereby compromising the whole foundation that Debian is
built upon. Possibly forcing hundreds of other compromises of
the DFSG.
3. "Fork" the Firefox source, to be changed to the point where it
was no longer defying the Mozilla Foundation's terms, but also
complying with the Debian Free Software Guide(DFSG).
I'll bet you can guess which one the maintainer(s) was(were) forced to
choose.
Any questions?
--
greg@gregfolkert.net
Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's
Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive
product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at
the playfield. -- Thane Walkup
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part