Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [PATCH] gnu: Add ungoogled-chromium?

[zap]

On 02/03/2019 11:52 PM, bill-auger wrote:
> re: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-02/msg00009.html
>
> i would like to remind readers of the guix-devel list that it was
> discussed some months ago, why no FSDG distros currently distribute
> chromium[1] - it appeared at that time, that most people in that
> discussion were in agreement that chromium should not be included in
> guix; and marius was instead hosting it in a private repo, as not to
> taint the main guix repos with dubious software - has there been a
> notable break-through since then?
>
> what is the evidence for this claim that this guix package is "free
> software only"? - what does "Marks beautiful computed-origin-method" do
> toward that end? - if a procedure for liberating any chromium-derived
> software has been discovered, this would be a marvelous accomplishment
> and very good news indeed, of which people outside of the guix dev team
> would also be interested to learn
>
> if the guix team has discovered some new information or has concocted a
> viable liberation recipe for chromium or any of it's offspring, then i
> hope that, for the benefit of all fellow Fosstopians, someone would
> present that information to the FSDG mailing list for review and
> discussion - it would be extra neighborly if that happened *before*
> offering this program to guix users, while fully knowing that the other
> FSDG distros are still intentionally suppressing it in solidarity
>
> again, i am totally indifferent as to whether anyone uses chromium or
> not - my only interest in this is that i would like to strengthen the
> FSDG by convincing FSDG distros to communicate and collaborate with each
> other, and to achieve consensus about common issues such as this, that
> clearly affect all distros equally; so that no one is compelled to ask
> "why does guixsd endorse that popular program if other FSDG distros
> reject it on principal?" - it is difficult enough to explain to users
> why these programs are rejected in the first place; but at least the
> way things are now, we can say that all FSDG distros are in agreement to
> err on the conservative side until a satisfactory liberation procedure
> is found and documented - currently, the documented liberation
> procedure is: "Remove program/package. Use GNU IceCat, or
> equivalent"[2] - if there is a better candidate procedure now, let us
> get it onto the table for discussion
>
> i would like to consider all FSDG distros as being part of a larger
> federation, sharing the same primary goals; but we cant all be reading
> all of the dev lists - let us communicate whenever applicable, in the
> common venue that exists for that purpose[3] - i tried enticing the
> folks on the guix team to do that previously - if there is indeed
> something new to announce regarding chromium's dubious FSDG status,
> please elect someone from guix to do so now - this would be very
> interesting news to the readers of that list, and your effort and/or
> accomplishment would be sincerely applauded - other FSDG distros would
> be happy (and some quite eager) to re-instate any of these
> chromium-derived packages if a consensus could be reached that any of
> them could be distributed 100% freely; but if all distros are to decide
> for themselves what is freely distributable and what is not, without
> evidence and without discussing it with the other FSDG distros nor the
> FSF, then the FSDG loses its teeth, and we all look wishy-washy and
> flakey on that, the main, central FSDG concern: which programs are
> freely distributable and which are not
>
>
> [1]: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2018-09/msg00264.html
> [2]:
> https://libreplanet.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_does_not_respect_the_Free_System_Distribution_Guidelines#chromium-browser
> [3]: https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-linux-libre

I agree, for a rather different reason, to be honest, its the same
reason I dislike firefox quantum and am wary of even Abrowser/Icecat,
webextensions is trash. And nothing is gained by using any web browser
with it. I mean how many web browsers that use it are free software?
Yeah...  Besides, there's also some bad news going forward with chromium:

https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/01/23/0048202/google-proposes-changes-to-chromium-browser-that-will-break-content-blocking-extensions-including-various-ad-blockers

I rather think more distros should at least if not outright replacing
firefox forks/firefox, should instead adopt this web browser:
https://github.com/g4jc/iceweasel-uxp/releases

It may be somewhat slower than your used to, but some of the addons for
it are still supported such as noscript, or ublock origin. It is
completely XUL based unlike Basilisk which its forked from.

I think at least though have it be an option instead of the standby. 
The more I hear about firefox/webextensions, the more I think its time
to ditch the new firefox in favor of continuing legacy support via
iceweasel-uxp which is a fork of Basilisk Browser which in turn is a
firefox 52 fork. 

I trust the developers of Hyperbola and also, I do not trust mozilla not
to screw up their web browser any further.

PS, Chromium still is trash probably even if you can fork out the bad
parts. It was after all made originally for google's purposes not the
free software community, and yes that includes Iridium Browser too in
the sense of being insecure.