Giuseppe Scrivano schreef:
Sam Geeraerts <[email protected]> writes:
Hm, for some reason I didn't get any mail yesterday, so I missed this one.
Anyway, by "there" you mean addons.mozilla.org? You link to that from
the GNUzilla addons page, so I'm not sure what you mean.
Yes, by "there" I mean addons.mozilla.org. The link present in the
GNUzilla addons page explains that not all addons present on that site
are free, so I don't see any problem to have this link on our page.
Why we shouldn't link to addons.mozilla.org explaining our reasons?
Well, I saw some contradiction between "we can't advise our users to use
this service" and yet linking to it. Of course, there's a difference
between linking to AMO's main page and just linking to a particular free
addon.
I agree with you that just adding a license field wouldn't help much
(although it wouldn't be completely useless). But if Mozilla could be
convinced to also add support for it in the AMO web interface then that
would remove the need for GNUzilla's own free addon list.
--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
