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