Groups > linux.debian.user > #201426

Re: basilisk-browser

From	Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.user
Subject	Re: basilisk-browser
Date	2018-10-19 08:40 +0200
Message-ID	<wKwBY-7Sd-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<wKb4t-36V-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <wKbxv-3wD-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <wKcjU-3Na-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <wKq3v-3WX-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 07:13:20PM -0400, Doug wrote:
> 
> On 10/18/2018 04:49 AM, Reco wrote:
> > 	Hi.
> > 
> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 10:02:42AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > > > I think its an good alternative to Firefox Quantum.
> > > > 
> > > > More Infos here: https://www.basilisk-browser.org/
> > > Indeed, it does look good.
> > No, it does not. UXP means Palemoon Browser.
> > Palemoon means extremely hostile upstream - [1].
> > 
> > Does Debian project really needs yet another Iceweasel incident?
> > 
> > Reco
> > 
> > [1] https://github.com/jasperla/openbsd-wip/issues/86
> > 
> > 
> I would like to know what you mean by "extremely hostile upstream"--
> I have been using PaleMoon Browser for several years and I like it.

Please note that I haven't qualified the browser itself.
Using Palemoon is OK for the upstream. More users = more recognition.
If it works for you - more power to you.

> Unlike Firefox, it doesn't change its stripes every few weeks. I am
> happy with an app that retains its interface for years and years and
> doesn't mess with my head. YMMV.

But, in this particular thread Palemoon or Basilisk qualities are not
relevant, as this discussion is about the possible inclusion of these
fine browsers into Debian main archive.

And for such inclusion certain criteria must be met, and one of those
is the ability to build the browser from the source the way that
maintainer sees fit. Upstream opposes that, see the link above.

Reco

Thread

basilisk-browser basti <mailinglist@unix-solution.de> - 2018-10-18 09:40 +0200
  Re: basilisk-browser <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2018-10-18 10:10 +0200
    Re: basilisk-browser Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2018-10-18 11:00 +0200
      Re: basilisk-browser <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2018-10-18 11:20 +0200
        Re: basilisk-browser Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2018-10-18 14:50 +0200
          Re: basilisk-browser Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2018-10-18 16:40 +0200
            Re: basilisk-browser basti <mailinglist@unix-solution.de> - 2018-10-18 17:00 +0200
              Re: basilisk-browser Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2018-10-18 17:10 +0200
        Re: basilisk-browser John Crawley <john@bunsenlabs.org> - 2018-10-19 03:00 +0200
      Re: basilisk-browser Doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> - 2018-10-19 01:40 +0200
        Re: basilisk-browser Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> - 2018-10-19 06:30 +0200
          Re: basilisk-browser Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2018-10-19 12:40 +0200
        Re: basilisk-browser Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2018-10-19 08:40 +0200
          Re: basilisk-browser Dominik George <natureshadow@debian.org> - 2018-10-19 09:00 +0200
            Re: basilisk-browser mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 09:30 +0200
              Re: basilisk-browser Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2018-10-19 12:30 +0200
                Re: basilisk-browser mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 13:10 +0200
              Re: basilisk-browser Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2018-10-19 12:50 +0200
            Re: basilisk-browser Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2018-10-19 11:30 +0200
              Re: basilisk-browser Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2018-10-19 15:40 +0200
            Re: basilisk-browser Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> - 2018-10-20 04:20 +0200
              Re: basilisk-browser fmneto@fmneto.com.br - 2018-10-20 05:00 +0200
                Re: basilisk-browser Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2018-10-20 14:00 +0200

csiph-web