On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 12/25/2010 8:34 PM, Gaveen Prabhasara wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Thiago Macieira<[email protected]>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Saturday, 25 de December de 2010 07:10:59 [email protected]
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Can't Google Chrome be out of MeeGo distribution? I mean make it
>>>> available
>>>> as a seperate downloadable on top of MeeGo distribution. So that no
>>>> special
>>>> mention and projection of it required.

Yes, that's a reasonable way to resolve these two issues.

>>>
>>> We can. There is a netbook build without Chrome.

The big issue here is not that we have a build with Chrome. The big
issues are that the *default* build we're promoting on the *front
page* of the (FOSS) MeeGo project
(1) Includes a non-Free browser, and
(2) Has the word "Google" all over the download links/surrounding text.

>>> But that doesn't help with having a nice browser by default.
>>
>> What about Firefox? They were co-operative as much as to
>> have a separate Maemo version. So is there any specific
>> reason why it's been overlooked in favour or Chrome?
>
> To be very blunt... Firefox isn't nearly as good a browser as Chrome or
> Chromium.....

First, what's so bad about Firefox?

Second, even if Firefox isn't as good as Chrome or Chromium, then why
are we bundling-in Chrome and not just Chromium? If we were to use
Chromium by default, then
(1) We'd have a FaiF browser, and
(2) We wouldn't have to display Google's name in such a visible manner
for EULA notices.

What do people think about using Chromium by default?

--R
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

Reply via email to