Upstream bug report: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=522196

From my point of view, GNU Icecat and Iceweasel are two different browsers. Of course, they have much in common (code, ancestry) but they differ in a grave way. GNU Icecat is about freedom.

It would be good for both gNewSense and GNU Icecat to drop Iceweasel and to adopt GNU Icecat. There are prepared packages for Ubuntu [1] and the Jaunty version builds with metad. We should use them and follow Icecat upstream. I offer maintaining the packages.

I don't know whether or not it is a good idea to merge GNU Icecat and Iceweasel. But if it is, a merge should happen on project layer, not on distribution layer.

[1] http://ppa.launchpad.net/gnuzilla-team/ppa/ubuntu/pool/main/i/icecat/

> Why you are going to solve again in IceWeasel the same problems IceCat is trying to solve?

I've done that already.  I extracted the relevant changes from IceCat and applied them:

  http://archive.gnewsense.org/gnewsense-metad/gnewsense/pool/overlays/rmh/byhand/firefox/xulrunner.diff

> 1) Rebranding.
> 2) Use free addons (so replace any link in the UI to point to the gnuzilla list).
> 3) Use free plugins.
> 4) Include CAcert in the root certificates.

#4 is done by Debian already.  #2 and #3 are already done in metad by importing the changes from IceCat.  As for #1 I have no problem with rebranding to something else, be it IceCat, upstream branding or anything.

> I don't, especially because I don't know them. (OT: why they aren't included upstream?). Can you please list these technical improvements?

See the following changelogs and their associated bug entries (hyperlinked via bug numbers):

  http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/x/xulrunner/xulrunner_1.9.1.5-2/changelog
  http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/i/iceweasel/iceweasel_3.5.5-1/changelog
  http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/i/iceweasel-l10n/iceweasel-l10n_3.5.5+debian-1/changelog

> It is not an useless debate, because it will create a lot of confusion. People will think that Iceweasel is free when in reality it is not but only the gNewSense version is, or are you going to rebrand it in another way?

As I said, I see this as a non-issue.  If you provide a patch to rebrand it (as IceCat, as upstream branding, anything, I really don't care), I will apply it.

> I don't see the point to provide a patch to make IceWeasel look and smell like IceCat when IceCat can be used as it is.

I have serious trouble understanding you.  It's not about the freedom issue, which has been dealt with.  You said branding was important because it creates confusion, but now you say it is pointless.  What is it about exactly?

I asked if the technical changes in IceCat could be enumerated.  Still no answer.

> Wouldn't be better for the free software community to don't duplicate our efforts?

Of course it would.  There are several man-months of QA work in that Iceweasel package, and so far the only solution that seems acceptable to you is to throw them away.  That's far from "avoid duplicating efforts", it's more like the opposite.

Since you specifically want me to remove the existing Iceweasel package (rather than just provide IceCat as an option), please give me a crystal clear answer on what is wrong with it.  If you think the branding is wrong, then say so.  If you found that it still recommends non-free add-ons in some way that I haven't noticed, then say so.  But I can't seriously believe you consider the technical improvements made by Debian an ethical problem.

When importing packages from Debian, if they don't fit with the goals of gNewSense we modify them.  We do this for a lot other packages and I don't see why Iceweasel is different.  I applied the freedom-related changes of IceCat into the Iceweasel package.

As for the re-branding, it's a non-issue for me.  If you provide a clean patch to revert Iceweasel rebranding to upstream, or re-brand it as IceCat, I will apply it and build a new package with it.  It's not a priority and the little free time I have could be better invested in other things, but TBH I'm tired of this useless debate.

Your question is ambigous.  Please explain what you mean by "use directly".  You mean for users to install it in metad?  For metad to include it as part of the distribution?  For IceCat to completely replace Iceweasel in metad?

Yes, but not in the near future - i'm unable to do any work atm.

Both Debian and GNUzilla make valuable changes to the Firefox codebase. It would be good to merge these two projects.