Librefox
Librefox copied to clipboard
intika
LibreFox has moved
Due to the halting of development on this repository, we have created a new, community run successor to LibreFox, called LibreWolf. Check out the new organization here! https://gitlab.com/librewolf-community
LibreVixen (female fox). Or if Mozilla's still bothered by that, then maybe LibreHawk. Name's the least important though - should revive the project first.
Vixen sounds nice Icevixen?
don't know about LibreHawk something more like a chipmunk the power not to be seen Tamias 'Tamias sibiricus'
'should revive the project first' yup
Keep in mind that there are Firefox forks, like Waterfox or Palemoon for a long time already
Which is why we need @intika to update us on the status of things. We could come up with alternate names, but we need to know what the issues are. In my opinion, an issue with naming is unlikely because as @Serkan-devel said, there are other similarly named forks. Unfortunately, we aren't hearing from @intika, possibly because they have been gagged by Mozilla. If only we could get an update from @intika…
Does anyone apart from @intika have push access to this repo? I know that @intika entrusted some of us (myself included) with access to the @Librefox organization, but the main repo remains in their name (I think @intika eventually revoked our push rights from some of the other repos on the org). I'm not sure how this might turn out, but here's an idea: what if we create and maintain a fork of the main repo in the organisation? The option to create a repo in the org's name seems to be working for me (although I'm not completely sure). I would love if there were some way of verifying whether @intika will be coming back to this project, but in spite of our attempts, we haven't heard from them. It's been 4 months since their last commit or visible interaction with this repository. They seem to be active on GitHub otherwise. Odds are they have been gagged by Mozilla, but then again, we are in the dark as to what copyright issues there might possibly be. If we do choose to take this path, we should probably do our research and make sure we don't fringe on Mozilla's copyright(s). If @intika does eventually, return to this repo (I hope they do), they could merge this repo with the fork or vice-versa.
Edit: @Serkan-Devel seems to have suggested something similar in the past.
I wrote Intika an e-mail a long time ago asking about this, and he didn't reply. He's probably not coming back then. I mean couldn't he at least reply privately?
@SuperRobinHood Nothing's private on the internet, of course, but I get your point. I once thought of writing to them too, but didn't.
He's probably not coming back then.
Sigh
Let me create a fork.
I've created a fork on the org. I've given @intika admin access, in case they return. I don't know the in's and out's of the project, so I'd like to give some other people write access so they can review PRs as well. How do I go about this?
One problem with directly forking a project is that Github won't show these forks in search results.
And search through files on that repo won't be possible either
@Serkan-devel Yes, and we can't add a link to the main repo either since no-one but @intika has push access to it.
Maybe one could clone the repo locally and push the fork as it's own repo, then migrate all the open issues from this repo to there
Let me contact support and ask them to switch Librefox/Librefox to 'normal mode', disassociating the repo from the fork. Can't delete the repo and redo since "Organization members can't delete repositories".
Why can not you not completely rewrite the program so make your own then you did not need @intika anymore he will not come back anymore. But I think it's a bit brazen of him that he can not give at least one answer to us where the problem is
The name LibreVixen does not sound bad
If you can devevelop this, just mirror it and start with a brand new repo and code base. There is no problem with that because the original devs clearly not in a position to communicate.
I don't understand how DCMA or this gag order works. I mean, aren't they supposed to let those accused know what the infringing part is and tell them what to do with it... use as is, attribute, don't modify, stop completely or whatever!~ This happened to the Gadgetbridge repo: https://github.com/Freeyourgadget/Gadgetbridge ... it completely went offline because a notice was filed and github blocked the whole thing, issues section as well (someone else's program's screenshots were used to discuss potential UI/UX solutions). Took a while, but things were cleared up, screenshots removed and the repo was restored completely.
If we do create a completely new organization, could we do it on gitlab? I do like the sound of LibreVixen as well by the way.
LibreVixen (female fox).
Just want to bring up that "Vixen" (or Wixen, Wicksen) means "to wank" in german ;-)
LibreVixen (female fox).
Just want to bring up that "Vixen" (or Wixen, Wicksen) means "to wank" in german ;-)
Ja aber schreibt man nicht Wichsen so ?
Vixen and Fork(en), LOL : )
Forking this project is fine, but, let's say things go smoothly for a few days/weeks... what is to say that Mozilla won't slap the DCMA/gag order again. So, that road will lead to the same place. My suggestion is to brainstorm a list of things that could have caused Mozilla to react in such a manner! Trying to identify the issue is very important... this is where everyone, our collective brains+research can help. Further, looking at other forks of Firefox and how those projects handled/avoided potential issues from our list could help! At least this way, we are creating a roadmap and systematically stepping through... because the road has mines (LOL) and we don't where they are!
I would try to avoid everything that could cause a tradmark issue but if mozilla sees "Librefox" as a threat then i assume they will try to go after anything they can. Mozilla doesnt want to protect their Brand but they want to kill projects that do not behave as they please. For that reason i want to suggest the option to move primary development over to a tor hidden service if that is feasable. not as a means to do something illegal but as an additional line of defense. a website and download on the normal web can be hosted by an independend party. this way the developers are safe and if the website is taken down it can easily be rehosted and mirrored somewhere else much like the Torproject itself.
#Trademark -- okay, but how? There are other forks and have been going strong for a while. #"... kill projects that do not behave ..." - Okay, and how are we not behaving? This is where we need to come up with more ideas on where, what and how Mozilla sees this project as a threat. For example:
**Stronger security / privacy: but they are already cherry picking features from the TOR browser **Integrating addons into FF itself, thus, making some addons redundant?
... What else could be pissing off Mozilla?
What you say about going stealth... giving the finger to Mozilla (LOL) and following TOR project's workflow (develop and release) sounds okay, but, not if you don't have to.
Well, we could start by forking to Gitlab, and if anything, we can move to a self hosted instance once we have the resources. I've taken the liberty of going ahead and creating the repository here: https://gitlab.com/librevixen . Just message me with your usernames so I can add you.
As for the reasons firefox is angry, I'm not too sure. I believe firefox has a compile time option that should remove all trademarks and logos and so on. We could use that.
See this fork of Iceweasel for Win, might offer some clue maybe? https://github.com/muslayev/iceweasel-win64
@theel0ja @shreyasminocha @nhynes @yoasif @bogachenko @szepeviktor
Please give gitlab username to @BeatLink