On 31.12.2011 13:38, Sam Geeraerts wrote:
Hannes Hauswedell wrote:
We would also like to point out that we will recommend Firefox, should it ever ship with a Free Software PDF-plugin by default.
What's FSFE's policy on Firefox' non-free binaries and recommending non-free add-ons?
I am not sure there is a policy. Of course we do not recommend non-free software, but IIRC the only/main problem with Firefox was the trademarked artwork, or not? Suggesting non-free plugins is of course not ideal, but as long as they don't ship any non-free plugins and don't pull them in automatically I don't see a problem.
AFAIK the binaries are identical from what you can build from source, so that is not a real issue for me either (this is different from chrome VS chromium, where chrome actually contains non-free software, i.e. flash, pdf-plugin etc).
And Mozilla aids the struggle for Software Freedom greatly, newer versions of Firefox and thunderbird all show the info "Mozilla Firefox is free and open source Software. Learn more about your rights and freedoms" (or something similar) on first start, which probably reaches more people than most of our campaigns combined. Also Mozilla did some very hard decisions to help promote Open Standards. Not opening the HTML5-capapbilities to plugins is one such decision which angered most (not caring) users, because they wanted h264 support -- a political move to support Theora and WebM.
=> I am fine recommending Firefox, but thats just my humble opinion
MK, can you discuss this on team@ ?
We are nowhere near the point where we will recommend Firefox with pdf.js, but we should agree early on, if we plan to work together with Mozilla on this.