buggNewSense GNU/Linux - Bugs: bug #28177, "merge" icecat and...

 
 

You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentification level.

bug #28177: "merge" icecat and iceweasel.

Submitted by:  Karl Goetz <kgoetz>
Submitted on:  Sat 05 Dec 2009 12:58:50 AM UTC  
 
Category: PackageSeverity: 3 - Normal
Item Group: All architecturesStatus: Need Info
Privacy: PublicAssigned to: None
Open/Closed: Open

(Jump to the original submission Jump to the original submission)

Fri 10 Dec 2010 08:43:00 PM UTC, comment #14:

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

Sam Geeraerts <samgee>
Project Administrator
Mon 21 Dec 2009 02:22:48 PM UTC, comment #13:

The real problems have been stated in this bug, and I'm already discussing them with Giuseppe. I have the impression you haven't read the bug log, as you're just restating the same things that have been said already.

If you want to help, talk to Giuseppe. Repeating the same discussion over and over doesn't help anyone.

Robert Millan <robertmh>
Mon 21 Dec 2009 01:05:01 PM UTC, comment #12:

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/

Patrick Schnorbus <chorse>
Sun 13 Dec 2009 08:38:52 PM UTC, comment #11:

from what I understood, the only difference between the free-IceWeasel and IceCat are these Debian patches, and the rebranding, but it is not very relevant.

Does it make sense to use IceCat and apply these patches to it?

I haven't looked at them yet, but if they are generic and non-Debian-specific patches, we can try to clean them (if there is need) and offer to Mozilla. In case they are not accepted, they can be included into IceCat.

I consider important to include IceCat instead of IceWeasel and support better its development as a free version of Firefox, in this way more users can take advantages of improvements, not only gNewSense users.

Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivano>
Sun 13 Dec 2009 07:16:09 PM UTC, comment #10:

> 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

Robert Millan <robertmh>
Sun 13 Dec 2009 06:02:32 PM UTC, comment #9:

> 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?


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

> I asked if the technical changes in IceCat could be enumerated.


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.

> But I can't seriously believe you consider the technical improvements made by Debian an ethical problem.


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

Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivano>
Sun 13 Dec 2009 05:43:19 PM UTC, comment #8:

> 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.

Robert Millan <robertmh>
Sun 13 Dec 2009 04:51:46 PM UTC, comment #7:

Iceweasel can be looked in a different way because there is already another project that is trying to make it free, IceCat.
Isn't that what you are trying to get from Iceweasel?

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?

The GNU project already has its free version of Firefox, 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.

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

Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivano>
Sun 13 Dec 2009 04:34:08 PM UTC, comment #6:

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.

Robert Millan <robertmh>
Sun 13 Dec 2009 03:05:00 PM UTC, comment #5:

I meant, IceCat should completely replace IceWeasel in metad. They have two different goals: IceCat is about freedom, as gNewSense is, IceWeasel is only about re-branding Firefox.

Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivano>
Sun 13 Dec 2009 02:38:41 PM UTC, comment #4:

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?

Robert Millan <robertmh>
Sun 13 Dec 2009 11:10:52 AM UTC, comment #3:

are there problems to use directly GNU IceCat?

Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivano>
Fri 11 Dec 2009 03:44:32 AM UTC, comment #2:

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

Karl Goetz <kgoetz>
Tue 08 Dec 2009 04:13:11 PM UTC, comment #1:

Can these changes be enumerated? Debian doesn't consider the freedom-related ones a priority (assuming they're considered for merge at all), but the technical privacy-related improvements could find their way there (or even in firefox upstream).

Robert Millan <robertmh>
Sat 05 Dec 2009 12:58:50 AM UTC, original submission:

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

Karl Goetz <kgoetz>

 

No files currently attached

 

Depends on the following items: None found

Items that depend on this one: None found

 

Carbon-Copy List
  • -unavailable- added by samgee (Posted a comment)
  • -unavailable- added by chorse (Posted a comment)
  • -unavailable- added by gscrivano (Posted a comment)
  • -unavailable- added by robertmh (Posted a comment)
  •  

    Please enter the title of George Orwell's famous dystopian book (it's a date):

     

     

    Follows 1 latest change.

    Date Changed By Updated Field Previous Value => Replaced By
    Fri 11 Dec 2009 03:44:32 AM UTCkgoetzStatusNone=>Need Info

    Back to the top


    Powered by Savane 3.1-cleanup