Re: Iceweasel and Firefox compatibility
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:20:49PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:05:47PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:45:04PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:43:19AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > > > John Goerzen wrote:
> > > > > Firefox/x.y.z Iceweasel/x.y.z
> > >
> > > Sounds too Firefoxy.
> > What's the problem with that? I thought Iceweasel *was* Firefox for all
> > practical purposes, modulo branding and usual distribution patches.
> Simply putting Firefox like that in the UA can sound like it is
> Firefox. And we still don't have the right to use the Firefox name on
> something that doesn't bear the Firefox logo.
I think this concern got addressed by other people (most notably Steve)
elsewhere in the thread. The UA is an API and/or interface, and until
MoCo actually starts acting against us using it, we should consider it
like an unenforced software patent.