Mozilla plugins packaging [Re: SELinuxDenyPtrace: Write, compile, run, but don't debug applications?]

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 16:28:23 +0200, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> Is not upstream, Mozilla in this case, Gnome for shell extensions,
> Google for Androids apps. etc responsible for conducting security
> auditing on extensions/addons they host/provide upstream?

One could automatically trust in Fedora to Mozilla plugins only if it's
licensing and reviewing requirements are equal or are subset the Fedora one's.

I do not see the requirements for a Mozilla plugin acceptance - as it does not
even have to be "open-source" (whatever that means) it just cannot comply with
the Fedora requirements.


> And another thing why do we want to package something that works out
> of the box for the end user

Upstream unreviewed binary blobs in no way work for me as a user.


Regards,
Jan