On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 15:56:17 +0100 jaromil <[email protected]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > > > sorry for quoting myself and so fast, but this is just flash news that > should close at least one concrete open issue with Chrome: > > 15:19 <_ale> jaromil: google-chrome --incognito > > that's it, works from our own OS menu then.
Well, we have a quick and easy solution :) I'm wondering if its ok (for a user sanity pov) having chromium run differently via a menu or via the binary directly (or via a launcher made by the user). Fixes include recompiling it so that option is by default, or putting in a wrapper script which is basically: chromium --incognito $@ > so far, left open issues are: > > - code audition (grepping for network operations and such) - hard! > (( should we simply trust some inquiries with trusted contacts? )) I feel we should treat it like all our other software: do a basic (for whatever value of basic seems appropriate) check if we can, then fix issues as people find them. > - a summary of licensing concerns, if any are left. so far, to > confirm A.J.'s, collaborative approach, the EULA debacle had happy > ending > > http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/update-to-google-chromes-terms-of.html > so i'm confident we can straighten up anything together, let's just > clear it up then. > > and at the end let's just hope the chrome logo won't be a problem :^) Or we could, ya know, remove it ;) kk -- Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS) Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer http://www.kgoetz.id.au No, I won't join your social networking group
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
