On Tue, 04 Mar 2008, Russ Allbery wrote: > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Here is a patch based heavily on Joey's original patch that describes > > that. This patch (similar to Joey's) doesn't include the URL > > canonicalization requirements of the secure BROWSER specification. They > > don't seem obviously necessary to me and are complex and would add a lot > > of additional wording to explain how to canonicalize URLs. > > > > Comments? Seconds? > > I have gotten no further feedback on this proposal other than Clint's note > that he finds this better-specified than the original ESR BROWSER > specification, but hesitates to comment further since he doesn't use it. > I would like to resolve this bug for the next Policy release, but I don't > want to just commit patches on my own say-so.
I'm not sure this change is still needed. While it might be good to have such a mechanism for some non-graphical programs, it probably makes most of Gnome programs buggy since they have their own method of browser selection (based on xdg-open AFAIK) and I'm not sure that they would conform to this specification. Thus I would rather NACK this policy change. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
