Gervase Markham schrieb:
On 09/06/15 04:22, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
What I'm saying is this: don't mix up the two arguments above. If
you're really upset by the Pocket integration, it's almost certainly
because of the first argument above, so don't get side-tracked by the
second argument.
Right. And the first argument is strange because this is not the first
time we've done this.
Most notably, when we introduced the Social API, we had a Facebook
button appear automatically in primary UI (which I found bad because of
what Facebook represents, but that's a slightly different topic).
The big difference is that in that case, we had defined a vendor-neutral
API and didn't just use whatever their API is and make ourselves
dependent on the partner (as we have with Pocket), we did not import
unreviewed code drops from the partner (as we did with Pocket, even
though we required them to open-source that code), and we didn't ship
their icon as part of the actual installed product but downloaded it
afterwards (unlike what we do with Pocket).
I think we should look into correcting those things, with the necessary
diligence (and not with another rushed effort) though.
I still wonder if shipping their product in our downloads is a trademark
issue esp. for people doing rebuilds of our code, where we intentionally
remove our own branding, but the Pocket icon remains.
Also, if you replace the URL in the prefs with a different service that
uses the same API, you now have the Pocket icon and Pocket-branded
strings refer to a completely different service, which I think is
problematic in the long run.
This may be OK for this initial release (even though I'm unhappy with
the quality decisions we made there in general), but we should IMHO
improve upon those things in further work and future releases (and the
proper release train testing of the changes).
KaiRo
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
