[arch-general] Can we use the "Firefox" name?

[Alessio Bolognino]

On Wed 2008-06-11 18:05, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote:
> I've a small dumb question.
> Why not use official branded version when there are many licensing
> problems? According to KISS and Arch philosophy (use upstream apps and
> not to patch unless necessary) this should be a good way.

But what happens if we *have* to apply a patch for some reason (as we
have to do, right now)? Should we change the package name? And if then
we don't need that patch anymore because it's merged upstream, should we
have to change back to the trademarked name? That sounds messy.

-- 
Alessio (molok) Bolognino

Please send personal email to themolok at gmail.com

Public Key http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xFE0270FB
GPG Key ID = 1024D / FE0270FB 2007-04-11
Key Fingerprint = 9AF8 9011 F271 450D 59CF  2D7D 96C9 8F2A FE02 70FB
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20080611/9d5c62e7/attachment.pgp>