Re: Iceweasel and Firefox compatibility
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> Mike Hommey wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 08:54:41AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
>>> Mike Hommey wrote:
>>>> I just decided I don't care anymore. So here is a deal to those reading
>>>> this thread. Give me a UA string that:
>>>> - Doesn't claim to be Firefox (i.e keep Iceweasel in it)
>>> Would it meet your requirements if it said something like "Linux;
>>> Debian-Iceweasel" down deep in it somewhere? We could keep Firefox
>>> where people expect it, and add Iceweasel deep in it?
>> That sounds like claiming to be Firefox, with a small note saying it's
>> actually Iceweasel. I'm much more in favor of keeping the Iceweasel
>> string as it is and adding something, this something having to be
>> defined.
>>
>> Let me suggest adding "(like Firefox/3.5)", but I'm not sure how the
>> crappy sites parsing the version number will deal with the closing
>> parenthesis.
>
> I'd propose something in the mood of :
>
> "Iceweasel/$debian-version (this is not Firefox/3.5 nor Safari/4 nor MSIE.
> Based on Gecko, not on KHTML nor on WebKit)"
That could lead to breakage, because we're really not using KHTML or
WebKit. We want to be accurate and claim what we truly are in the least
surprising manner.
>
> The list could then be broadly extended to all the things Iceweasel is not
> without lying. It would still tell that Iceweasel is Iceweasel and it would
> still provide the needed UA crap to all the crappy sites that might be based
> on it.
>
> Regards,
>
> OdyX
>
>
>
Reply to: