it's OK. private = secure in the same way policy compliant = secure. :-) > On Dec 30, 2016, at 8:44 AM, Daniel Quintiliani <[email protected]> wrote: > > Numerous remote code execution vulnerabilities? You're kidding me right? > > -- > > -Dan Q > > >> On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 11:06:10 +0100, Narcis Garcia <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> People asking for a new IceCat version for Windows, they already have >> IceCat 38.8.0 ans it seems usable. >> Any freedom and security enhancement they ask for, it's to GNU/Linux >> direction. >> >> >> El 29/12/16 a les 23:58, Daniel Quintiliani ha escrit: >>> I think there's been a real problem lately where complaints by users are >>> being confused with official project decisions. Like when v45.5 and v45.3 >>> were released Linux only, some of us asked if a Windows version would be >>> available, and it turned into arguments about whether we should expand >>> non-DRM browsers under unfree systems. Instead of arguments we need to >>> focus on the project and official policy vs mailing list opinions. We >>> should also focus on who the decision makers actually are, to my knowledge >>> Ruben has been busy lately but someone can easily say "Why should we >>> maintain a Windows or Mac version of IceCat?" and be confused for someone >>> who is making decisions for the project. >>> >>> -- >>> >>> -Dan Q >>> >>>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 09:03:32 -0800, Gary Driggs <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Daniel Quintiliani wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Ruben having discontinued Windows support for IceCat was the best and >>>>> easiest way to force most of the human population into DRM. >>>> >>>> Where did you see any such announcement? >>>> >>>> Maybe we should start an alternate mailing list, >>>> [email protected], so the rest of us can discuss technical >>>> topics in peace. >>>> -- >>>> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org >>> >> >> -- >> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org > > > > -- > http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
-- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
