On Aug 24, 2008, at 11:29 AM, Kyle Hamilton wrote: > I'm rather appalled that you are ignoring the realities of > US government user requirements. I can state with enough knowledge of > regulation and policy behind me that I believe that it is primarily > due to your lack of acknowledgement of the requirements in-place that > Firefox has not enjoyed greater US government agency penetration.
Mozilla's goal, since the beginning of the project, has been to provide free and open source software to end-users, specifically consumers who did not have a choice for browsers after the demise of Netscape. That said, there's always more to do, and there's nothing stopping anyone from contributing in order to make Firefox better for any government. Fwiw, Firefox has users in government agencies around the world (including the French Gendarmerie Nationale.) http://www.forbes.com/2006/02/06/ballmer-microsoft-france- cx_cn_0206autofacescan03.html > Simply put, the CCK is not an option for people who prefer to use > Firefox 3, or for anyone who wishes to use or deploy any other Mozilla > product. For most people it has been recommended to, it never truly > was an option. It is a shame that the CCK isn't updated and isn't more widely used, but there's nothing stopping anyone, including developers from just about any government, from putting efforts into the CCK. > I respect your tenacity, MisterSSL, but I sincerely hope that you > realize that it is solely YOUR office and YOUR office's mandates -- > mandates which you have repeatedly been requested to change, each and > every request completely ignored and the requestor directed to > something which cannot meet their needs -- which is preventing wider > adoption of Firefox, Thunderbird, and all other Mozilla Foundation > products. In my opinion, it is exactly _because_ of the efforts and leadership of the NSS team, Nelson, Wan-Teh, Bob Relyea, Bob Lord, Kai Engert, and all of the NSS module owners (as well as other Mozilla modules) and contributors world-wide, that Firefox has over 200 million users worldwide and is the second most popular browser behind the convicted monopolist from Redmond, WA, USA. That the US Government chooses to use software from the very company that the US DoJ itself indicted is beyond my comprehension. http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft Does Mozilla have more to do? Yes. Is there anything stopping anyone from contributing? No. Should we expect the module owners, who already have responsibilities for supporting goals more important than "US government agency penetration" to drop what they are doing in order to do that? I'll leave that to your own conclusion. I've already made up my mind on this issue. Gen Kanai _______________________________________________ dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
