Jump to content
MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. ×

My Browser Builds (Part 2)


 Share

Recommended Posts

I guess this?

49 minutes ago, Matt A. Tobin said:

BTW Have I mentioned you are in direct violation of the Mozilla Public License 2.0?

Specifically, Section 3.2 which states:

Quote

3.2 If You distribute Covered Software in Executable Form then:

  a. such Covered Software must also be made available in Source Code Form, as described in Section 3.1, and You must inform recipients of the Executable Form how they can obtain a copy of such Source Code Form by reasonable means in a timely manner, at a charge no more than the cost of distribution to the recipient; and

The MPL defines Source Code Form as follows:

Quote

1.13. “Source Code Form”

  means the form of the work preferred for making modifications.

Your patch files are not sufficient. You MUST provide the full source code with your modifications. All software created with covered code I have worked on is currently in breach of the license.

Seems like this was declared rather suddenly?  I mean, if @roytam1 was in violation of these clauses since the start of his "New Moon for XP" project at least 2 years ago, why wait until now to say so?

c

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I didn't say a word about the fake Pale Moon build. I said the navigator and mail clients. Since he has the source code up for the fake Pale Moon builds he is in compliance there. Every person who modifies covered code then distributes an executable form must satisfy the MPL. One cannot just give a zip file of patch files of the applications and call it done.. He must disclose the entirety of covered source code INCLUDING making the platform code along with it available by some reasonable means.

The easiest way would be to clone binoc-central (preferably with a different repo name) and use a platform submodule so that when cloned you get the complete source code. He could also put up a tarball but that takes a lot of space over time.

However, as a code contributor of covered code I am informing him of the breach of the open source license under which his executable forms derived from. If he wishes not to comply then the MPL is terminated. Of course he can take me out of the equation by purging all contributions I have made to covered code but other contributors to covered code will subsequently pursue this matter.

Edited by Matt A. Tobin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Matt A. Tobin said:

Would you mind removing any copyright material from your repo? And while this is not a requirement, you may want to purge unrelated code such as my extensions.

official brandings are removed, what else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, roytam1 said:

official brandings are removed, what else?

Unstable branding, the copyright artwork in my extensions, namely ABPrime, ANYTHING that goes to binaryoutcast.com and you may NOT use my proprietary api key for geolocation. In fact, that entire preferences file that you stole is NOT covered under the MPL. It is completely proprietary as well as the UAOverrides preferences file.

Additionally, confvars, application.ini? That is unacceptable. You may not call it Borealis. And you may not piggyback on BinOC services and resources.. I thought you understood this crap by now.

Edited by Matt A. Tobin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this is why the complete source for covered code must be disclosed. He distributing or otherwise using my copyrighted material and trademarks without permission and I won't have it. I suspected as much but until I forced him to actually comply with the license it was unknown. SO not only was it non-compliance it was incomplete discloser of changes and he was using my materials in order to produce inferior products to damage me.

Edited by Matt A. Tobin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Matt A. Tobin said:

Additionally, confvars, application.ini? That is unacceptable. You may not call it Borealis. And you may not piggyback on BinOC services and resources.. I thought you understood this crap by now.

 

On 12/22/2019 at 7:10 PM, Matt A. Tobin said:

The MOZ_APP_NAME would stay the same of course, that's fine. Same with application.ini who's values failing the existence of some alt build configuration dictate the location of the application profile. SAME goes with NSIS generated installer/uninstaller and helper.exe used by both NSIS and shellservice as well as shellservice its self.

Unfortunately, this is set in stone and it is too unreasonable to change that stuff now. Maybe two years ago but not now as it would cause too much end-user trouble. Not to mention it would be annoying from a patch porting point of view. So that's fine. So just need to change the name in branding configure.sh, graphical assets, and l10n. Pretty simple once you have the name and logo.

Now, I can sort of dig the circles with lines in em and perhaps do something with the concept though they MAY be a bit abstract. However, I hope that modified Firefox logo is not a serious contender because clearly that would not acceptable to Mozilla as it would get the the drones all fired up in a second and of course blame us not you for it.

The general problem with the New Moon branding was it was intended to be basically like the Firefox Nightly branding and while yes it pulled double duty as generic branding anyone could use, it is still intrinsically linked to us and despite the feeling from some people here that there is and never has been any confusion, I can tell you there is.. People know that Pale Moon is the older Firefox-based browser with the interface of Firefox 4-28 and that builds are sometimes called New Moon. But with the divergent path of what continues to happen to support Windows XP what is produced isn't even going to be an unbranded Pale Moon for Windows XP as most people see it. Perhaps that is how you see it but as time goes on the differences mount.

Let me put it to you another way, what if we had just kept the original non-trademarked Nightly branding for Pale Moon, both Basilisk's, and you also created your other half-dozen Firefox-based builds.. ALL called Nightly because that is what was there. How could you tell them apart then? Is it reasonable to put the burden on us to explain to people that the Windows XP builds you produce aren't the same as someone else producing Windows 7 unbranded builds or unbranded mac builds which also use the New Moon branding because mac isn't at the official level yet.

The un-knowledgeable user who doesn't read more than maybe two sentences of a paragraph would assume New Moon == Pale Moon because they look the same and because despite being referred to as generic branding the name is too unique and intrinsically linked with us. This is the result of a decision made six years ago and it turns out to not have been a very good one on our part. Let me also say again, that this happens in the wild. THERE IS CONFUSION because I have specifically gone out of my way to berate and s*** on the confused user because it p***ed me the hell off and does every single time. Should I? No. Do I? Yeah. Should I continue to do so.. Well despite what one may conclude I actually don't know.. I do know that I don't really want to be angry about it anymore. I do know that over the past two years it has accomplished nothing. I also know that roytam1 took the unofficial branding as-is but hasn't been bothered to change it for whatever reason that may be. I do know I am a half-way decent designer and have the technical knowledge to implement it easily for roytam1 to slot into place. I also figured I had nothing to loose by str8 up offering to do it instead of expecting someone else to. A very common situation I find my self in a lot these days actually.

I talked, bitched, complained, pleaded with and begged SeaMonkey for almost 10 years to not turn out the way it turned out and it accomplished nothing but in the Pale Moon project and beyond to the Unified XUL Platform, lots of things have gotten done through hard a** work via cooperation, coordination, and discussion and maybe that should be applied elsewhere. Especially to places that have historically annoyed the hell out of me for whatever real or imagined reason. After all, it is a process to better ones self and help make world at large better too. Can't have it all in a day but you can't have anything if you don't try.

So I am trying (and yes there is likely a joke in there). Besides, I can't keep calling the paradigm "new" if it is the same old crap, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My applications aren't Pale Moon. Binary Outcast is NOT Moonchild Productions. There is a difference.

It is very unfortunate that I can't trust anyone to look out for my intellectual property. However, more positively the situation is being rectified. Though, I personally believe the situation should not have had to happen at all. All it takes is some work in order to avoid such things. Something I been saying for three years.

Thank you for making the changes.. But I wish you had done so when you first started producing builds of software some of which has not been released yet. Especially, when you knew it early on with my projects.

Also, may want to change the searchplugins in communicator/searchplugins the ones that are Pale Moon specific. I have permission to use those, you do not. Also kill, other-licenses/7zstub/binoc in your configuration it will use the 7z sfx from platform though you should really reshack your own based on the platform one.

In any case, I'll be watching and I will hold you to the letter of the MPL and defend my rights.

Edited by Matt A. Tobin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roytam - Could you please upload the IceApe for Aug 8th, because the file you most recently linked to

----------------

New build of IceApe-UXP for XP!

Test binary:
https://o.rths.ml/gpc/files1.rt/iceape.win32-20200801-id-eed056673-ia-41157bf-uxp-091749192-xpmod.7z

--------------------

is exactly the same in name and contents as the build from Aug, 1.

Thank you for your great work.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

== Instagram problem ==

The latest NM27 build (palemoon-27.9.7.win32-git-20200808) opens instagram login page and accepts the credentials. Many thanks @roytam1 for that.

Unfortunately at that point it is unable to show pages: they are displayed still as blank pages.

1.  Is someone using some workaround trick that works to show them?

2.  Will be possible to fix in future builds this issue?

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW @roytam1 If you are wondering about shellservice and nsis installer code.. I am gonna be upgrading that modifying the copy from Pale Moon which was modified from Basilisk when Pale Moon was ported to UXP from Tycho.

The technical reason is simply this.. The Suite Shellservice is not very appropriate for a standalone web client and over the years the SeaMonkey people have mangled it pretty badly and pieces of it are ancient. Basically getting a fresh copy that is geared to JUST a web client will improve matters greatly. The reason the nsis scripting is involved is because on Windows the shellservice needs to issue commands to an external application that can elevate and Mozilla shared routines in nsis scripting to produce the helper.exe which serves during install as well as commands issued by shellservice. Those two items need to be consistent. But yeah until I get it replaced you can just revert that. However, I suggest once it is replaced and verified you should switch it to that for best results.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Dave-H changed the title to My Browser Builds (Part 2)
  • dencorso unpinned this topic
  • Dave-H locked and pinned this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...