Re: [GNU-linux-libre] review PureOS ISO

[Zlatan Todoric]

On 11/09/2016 06:08 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 09.11.2016 18:42, Zlatan Todoric wrote:
> > On 11/09/2016 05:24 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> > > What browser the PureBrowser is based on? What add-on repository does it
> > > use?
> > It is based on Firefox ESR and it will have two xul extension from
> > archive (https and ublock). We discovered bug (non-responsive tabs) so
> > we temporarily removed it from alpha 2 image but we put in firefox-esr
> > with those two extensions. It will come back with final release (where
> > we also hope to iron out all the bugs you find and report - again
> > https://tracker.puri.sm/maniphest/ for reporting bugs).
> >
> > In future we plan to diverge a bit more from Firefox regarding defaults
> > (or they maybe choose to have same defaults so we abandon the
> > re-branding and avoid their trademark issues (not that it will happen,
> > but just for our sake)).
> Please note that the Firefox official repository includes many nonfree
> extensions. PureOS can't comply with the GNU FSDG if it's using Firefox
> default repository. FSF and GNU IceCat maintain a list of free
> extensions for Firefox-based browsers.

We are mirroring Debian main archive for that and AFAIK Firefox is 
entirely FLOSS, but it allows non-free extensions. It would be a bit 
radical to remove it because users can access non-free extensions - we 
can use lynx to access websites that promote nonfree things etc etc. I 
think many distros used Iceweasel and now will use Firefox if they are 
based on Debian - and again, Firefox is Free software AFAIK.

> https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/
> http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/IceCat
>
> In my opinion, PureOS should use GNU IceCat instead of Firefox and
> support (with developers and donations) its development.
>
> Moreover, last time I checked Firefox was by default DRM-enabled (by
> using a nonfree add-on), and that is not acceptable.

I don't think it is enabled for Linux builds, but at least not for 
Debian ones.

> It would be great if Purism could join the existing efforts instead of
> only focusing on rebranding (sometimes without even crediting the
> projects you are using) and marketing.

That, again, has nothing to do with our FSF endorsement and about our 
business - in this particular case we want to avoid any chance of 
Firefox trademark "war". Please keep it inside the limits of this 
discussion which is PureOS road to FSF endorsement.

> Thanks,
> Tiberiu
>
> --
> https://ceata.org
> https://tehnoetic.com