3 ms·
Why that? AFAIK, they were not allowed to use the name firefox since their version of firefox contains or used to contain unofficial patches and mozilla forbids
by Xylakant 12y ago
Why that? AFAIK, they were not allowed to use the name firefox since their version of firefox contains or used to contain unofficial patches and mozilla forbids the use of the name "firefox" in that case.
Renaming was one of the options, dropping the patches the other.
- Lai0chee 12y agoHow do other distros solve this "issue"?
- Xylakant 12y agoAFAIK, they do not include unofficial patches.
- _delirium 12y agoSome do, but they have them Mozilla-approved. Vendor-specific patches are allowed in a product called "Firefox", if Mozilla approves the patches before release. I believe Red Hat is one vendor that does that. Debian won't agree to include a package that needs third-party approval of modifications, though.
- Xylakant 12y agoI'm sorry about the miswording - I meant "unoffical" as in "not officially approved". Thanks for the correction.
- sethrin 12y agoPlease see this for more background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation_software_rebranded_by_the_Debian_project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation_software_re...