Re: Should Epiphany browser be renamed because of conflict w/ game name?

[Steve Bergman <sbergman rueb com>]

On Tue, 2006-10-17 at 15:37 +0000, Jason Spiro wrote:
> On 2006-10-16, Reinout van Schouwen <reinouts gnome org> wrote:
> > As you may be aware, there are more distro's out there outside Debian.
> > There is no other distro that has a name conflict. Since Epiphany is
> > actively maintained and, as you indicate yourself, the Boulderdash
> > clone is in a state of abandonment, the obvious solution from my point
> > of view is to remove the game from the distro, or to rename the
> > package to 'epiphany-game'.
> 
> I filed a bug at http://bugs.debian.org/393521 - no response yet; we
> will see what happens.


Not to offend anyone... but as a relatively newly converted Epiphany
user, I'd have to say that Epiphany is absolutely the best browser that
few know or care about.

Epiphany is nominally Gnome's official browser.  But if there were a
package named "Konqueror' or even Konqueror-Game, there would have been
a brouhaha long ago.

And if there were a package called "Firefox-Game", the cease and desist
order  would  be  issued from Mozilla legal within minutes.

Which is not to say that Mozilla Corp is not within their rights to
defend their trademarks, because I don't want to go there.

I find it a bit odd that Gnome based distros use all the other standard
Gnome apps, and then pass over Epiphany in favor of the non-Gnome
Firefox.  This is especially odd since it seems that Linux distros seem
to be very much second class citizens from the point of view of Mozilla
Corp, as evidenced by Debian's recent problems (the root cause having
little to do with trademarks and very much to do with the
maintainability of Firefox in a stable distro, when you think about it)
and this item from a Fedora dev:

http://lwn.net/Articles/200885/

It seems to me that XUL-runner + Epiphany would be a much more distro
friendly combo than the monolithic and indifferent Firefox/Mozilla.

Sorry for the rant.  Consider it a compliment to Epiphany.

But to get back on topic, I guess we could use more of a cheerleading
section.  Firefox has spreadfirefox.org.  Perhaps a spreadepiphany.org
is needed.  More likely, a strong pitch made to Gnome-based distro
maintainers.

Anyway, I'm glad Epiphany is here for me to use and enjoy.

Good work!

-Steve