Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Xylakant 4228 days 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.
1 comments
Lai0chee 4228 days ago
How do other distros solve this "issue"?
link
sethrin 4228 days ago
Please see this for more background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation_software_re...
link
Xylakant 4228 days ago
AFAIK, they do not include unofficial patches.
link
_delirium 4228 days ago
Some 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.
link
Xylakant 4228 days ago
I'm sorry about the miswording - I meant "unoffical" as in "not officially approved". Thanks for the correction.
link