El 2016-10-04 18:36, Joshua Haase escribió:
Luke <[email protected]> writes:
_- So this puts the nonprism projects at a crossroads. Do we want to
favour accessibility and "features" over "privacy"?_
I think non-prism should be expected to favour privacy and break sites
where needed.
From my personal opinion, nonprism should provide security and privacy
by default. Users can choose to opt-out of nonprism if they wish. This
is easily done by A) not using nonprism, or B) using about:config
and/or
user.js to override the settings.
I'd rather have nonprism as opt-in.
When using Parabola GNU/Linux-libre you customize your system and it's
trivial to change your packages from [libre] to [nonprism].
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
[PCR repo]
I don't understand why libre-software packages, apparently respectful
with user rights and stable are not available for all users. 🤔 That's
why I think 'PCR' repository should be activated by default. And if they
are unstable packages, they should go into another repo like
'pcr-testing'.
[nonprism repo]
Libre Software is not only about a license, but about respect for user
rights. That's why we use it and we've all previously decided that
rights are before than features. We want to take advantage of such
features (like ubication) but not at cost of giving this info to others
who use it against users.
Nonprism packages replace other packages in the same way that libre
packages do. So I think 'nonprism' repo should also be activated by
default.
Thanks,
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
