| Autor |
Nachricht |
|
|
Titel:
 Verfasst am: 25.09.2006, 23:45 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 1005
|
|
By the way, don't get me wrong, I don't think that the main kernel guys are bad engineers, I assume that they are excellent kernel engineers. I just don't see much sign of any other areas where that excellence shows itself, especially not in Linus nowadays. He just strikes me as a kid throwing a tantrum when someone threatens to mess with his toys. NO NO, I won't do it I won't do it and you can't make me so there. That's really the depth of his argument from what I've read.
Meanwhile Stallman and Moglen strike me as very mature, very well considered, with constantly expanding horizons, due to travelling around the globe constantly talking up free software, meeting with diverse groups of freesoftware advocates, in different countries, cultures, etc. I'm especially consistently impressed with just how reasonable they try to be, as well as how fundamentally rational and consistent their positions strive to be. Of course, that's the whole point behind the free in free software, it's not a compromise, it's not a sellout. So when you try to push compromise solutions they just won't be as rational or as consistent, and will almost by definition create underlying problems and inconstencies in positions, since the positions aren't actually coherent, at least not from what I can gather.
Linus, for example, accuses them of being closed in terms of the gpl 3, which is ridiculous when you consider that linus and his core developers also have absolute veto power over the kernel code itself. What Linus really means is that they didn't do exactly what he wanted when he demanded that some parts be removed. That makes the process 'closed'. Another very childish action by Linus, who seems dead set on making himself as unlikeable as humanly possible in as short a time as possible.
But that's simply another example of just how blind Linus and those guys really are becoming. One poster in the lwn.net threads, for example, points to the constant revision process for the gpl 3 as evidence that it is flawed. As if reacting to public input and changing the document to better deal with the objections shows anything but an open process. But that's the degrees that the people opposed to this have to go intellectually, and it shows the relative emptiness of their core beliefs in my opinion.
decent opinion piece here today:
http://www.libervis.com/gplv3_is_to_pre ... ot_kill_it
plus of course read up on what stallman and moglen actually are saying, many good interviews/transcripts out there
list of recent transcripts on gpl 3 here:
http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/#transcripts
If you read this stuff anything like I do, you'll start noticing how level, balanced, clear, coherent, etc, these arguments are. And how hard they are working to make the process open, and as responsive to the needs of the actual free software users around the world. Obviously they can't bend as far as the kernel guys want, since that's bending too far from the principles of free software, which is something that Linus and company really should understand better than they appear to.
I would say that if corporations find the gpl 3 this disturbing, then it is very likely that the FSF is on exactly the right track. If you recall, the GPL 2 was called a cancer, communistic, and various other labels, until the corporate world started to see the benefits of not having to create their own operating systems and applications from scratch.
Not to mention that the anti gpl 3 stuff sounds exactly the same as the anti gpl 2 stuff I used to read, not wanting to change, fear, uncertainty, etc. When it's really not that radical at all, it just tightens loopholes.
<sorry, this drifted too far off topic, though it is related to the firefox issue in my opinion in terms of root causes, but now I'll shut up> |
_________________
Read more on dist-upgrades using du-fixes-h2.sh script.
New: rdiff-backup script
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 02:07 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 26. Jun 2005
Beiträge: 389
|
|
| h2, thanks for the insights and the links. Will take some time to read through though. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 08:35 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 02. Nov 2005
Beiträge: 127
|
|
hmm well ive read enough of all that.......... conclusions? maybe we will all be on kanotix bsd in a few years  haha |
_________________
Linux user 403389 and Herbaholic Trichopath
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 09:25 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 07. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 526
Wohnort: Waliser Märze
|
|
h2 I had already read most of the links you posted but don't draw the same conclusions. Linus may well be showing himself in a bad light but being a great developer does not mean he is also naturally eloquent in expressing his views, hence the frustration showing. Stallman et al are fighting on political grounds, Linus purely technical. I am as cynical as most but just to say all the kernel developers are in the pocket of corporations is really far too simplistic, they need paying to live or maybe you think they should fund kernel development from their own pocket.
There are major practical issues changing the kernel to gplv3. It would appear to me that the contentious issues around DRM are more political than technical. It would also seem more than 11 kernel developers are against gplv3 www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/78631 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 09:49 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 02. Mai 2004
Beiträge: 471
Wohnort: Portland, OR, USA
|
|
Fascinating topic. At least it answered the question of why Debian uses a blue globe instead of the Firefox logo. (Which is not a bad thing, since I've never seen an icon of the Firefox logo that didn't look ragged.)
This situation is sort of similar to the distributors of Red Hat derivatives, who are free to use the official source rpms to create their own distros, but have to strip out all Red Hat branding.
But we're not talking about an entire distro here, just a web browser -- even if it's "the" web browser on Linux. It is odd to hear someone like Mr. Connor be so hard-assed as to demand that Debian, one of the major Linux distros, comply with its terms, or 1) make a version completely devoid of its trademarks (including changing its name); or 2) banishing it to non-free (meaning it won't be in the base distro), instead of coming up with some amicable solution. His company's demands are 1) Debian must use the real Firefox logo (which conflicts with the DFSG); and 2) Debian must submit all modifications made to Firefox to Mozilla Corp. for approval before inclusion in Debian.
You'd think Mozilla Corp. would be more interested in having its software included in a major Linux distro than in being "right."
Here's what they say in their trademark policy:
"Those taking full advantage of the open-source nature of Mozilla's products and making significant functional changes may not redistribute the fruits of their labor under any Mozilla trademark. For example, it would be inappropriate for them to say "based on Mozilla Firefox". Instead, in the interest of complete accuracy, they should describe their executables as "based on Mozilla technology", or "incorporating Mozilla source code." They should also change the name of the executable so as to reduce the chance that a user of the modified software will be misled into believing it to be a native Mozilla product."
It would seem that the "significant functional changes" part is what's enabling our friend, Mr. Connor, to demand that the Debian maintainers run their patches by his company in exchange for the use of the Firefox name (and logo! Don't forget to include the logo!).
Their trademark policy also states, "By non-disparaging, we mean that, outside the bounds of fair use, you can't use our trademarks as vehicles for defaming us or sullying our reputation." So please, be careful when you say, "MozillaSux ®". |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 12:19 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 07. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 526
Wohnort: Waliser Märze
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 13:14 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 05. Dez 2005
Beiträge: 414
Wohnort: Auckland, New Zealand
|
|
So what do people think debian will end up doing? ...
1) reject mozilla's demands and ship debian without firefox
2) reject mozilla's demands and ship debian with firefox but call it a different name, or
3) accept mozilla's debmands, and break their philosophy
I hope it's not number 3, as I like debian because it's fiercely non-corporate.
But if it's number 1 or 2, then will that mean debian will alienate itself from the other linux distro's? ... I'm assuming here that Red Hat and Suse would still ship with firefox. Although I'm guessing that the likes of Ubuntu etc would still ship their releases with firefox? And what of Kanotix? |
_________________
Linux is evolution, not intelligent design - Linus Torvalds
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 13:17 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 08. Dez 2005
Beiträge: 300
|
|
| i think Fedora does the same sort of thing with FF...they turned off the update function in same fashion as Debian. Not sure if Fedora/Redhat will get same treatment from Mozilla Inc. as Debian is getting |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 15:40 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 07. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 526
Wohnort: Waliser Märze
|
|
|
DeepDayze hat folgendes geschrieben::
i think Fedora does the same sort of thing with FF...they turned off the update function in same fashion as Debian. Not sure if Fedora/Redhat will get same treatment from Mozilla Inc. as Debian is getting
It states in the linked corespondence that red hat and Novell already comply with Mozilla's policies ie submit any changes through Mozilla.
Debian cannot ship Firefox as it is as it does not comply with DFSG they have said they will comply with Mozilla's guidelines which can mean only one thing if they want to continue shipping Firefox and that is rename it. This will impact on Debian derivitives, maybe Ubuntu will do something different which will also then affect Meppis. It seems a poor business decision by Mozilla as I am sure the Google search bar will be removed which is a source of income via click thoughs not to mention the bad will it will cause. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 16:18 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 02. Nov 2005
Beiträge: 127
|
|
| Surely the google search bar would remain- as it is a useful feature- but the data it adds to the search quiery could easily be removed- then no more money for mozilla.... |
_________________
Linux user 403389 and Herbaholic Trichopath
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 21:46 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 1005
|
|
|
Zitat:
I am as cynical as most but just to say all the kernel developers are in the pocket of corporations is really far too simplistic, they need paying to live or maybe you think they should fund kernel development from their own pocket.
titan, nowhere did I say that the kernel developers 'were in the pockets of corporations'. In fact, I went very far to make explicitly clear that the process of internalizing values is much more subtle than that. It's you in this case that is trying to simplify a complex and subtle process, and to put words into my mouth. I tried, but I guess failed in your case, to make explicitly clear how that process works.
And I didn't say that they should fund this out of their own pocket. Why people insist on trying to simplify points and reduce them to black and white opposites is absolutely beyond me. I don't say this to be rude, but you really are seriously mistating what I said, and not in a subtle way. I suggest you reread much more carefully what Linus said in the Groklaw threads, and notice how at every step he gets a bit more hysterical, until he finally begins to reveal what he really thinks. Which is useful for anyone paying attention, that's an old method, get the person you want to learn something from either drunk or mad and they'll soon show their true colors. This formula has been known for thousands of years, and it's actually kind of sad to see that Linus was naive enough to fall into that trap, but he was. But I'm not saying anyone laid a trap out for him, just that he fell into a trap he created himself. If you're misreading me this badly, are you absolutely certain that you are also not misreading the other materials you have read?
To make it explicitly clear: the danger in working with and around people who all share essentially the same values is that you will begin to get absorbed into those values, and to lose your ability to resist the values you did not start out having, but which the organization around you does have. This is virtually impossible to avoid. There is no conspiracy in this process, it's just normal human behavior, and always has been. The more intense the work you do, day in and day out, the less likely that you will be able to resist this process. And few things are more intense than kernel development.
One thing I've found over and over again is that once this happens, the people who have fallen into this trap will refuse to see that it's happened, will deny that it's happened, and will get increasingly upset when it's pointed out to them that it probably has happened.
By doing this they are essentially saying that they are cabable of rising above their daily lives and activities, like gods or saints, and to not be influenced by them at all. That's a totally ridiculous thing to believe or expect anyone to do, but that's essentially what they are pretending they can do in this case. This is beyond naive, but it's also par for the course among types like this, as I noted, I've seen this process first hand, it wasn't pleasant then, and it's not pleasant now.
The fact that the kernel developers are unable to recognize this process is the real problem, as I said above. To translate this into the simplest terms: they cannot be as objective as they would like to think that they are, and the arguments they are putting forward just happen to coincide with the essential positions of the corporations with whom they work and that pays most of their salaries. This is not an accident. But it's also not any type of conspiracy, it's no different than people on a sports team evolving a team mentality the longer they play together. You internalize things, you avoid issues that will raise fundamental disagreements in order to get your daiily work done as smoothly as possible. So if HP for example feels strongly that patent protection is not something they are comfortable with, voila, the kernel developers also feel that patent protection is not something they are comfortable with.
They need people like Stallman as much as Stallman needs them, they form a perfect team: linus, cox, morton etc are great kernel hackers, but to be great at one thing you almost always have to sacrifice something else. There are very few universal geniuses around, and Linus is most definitely not one of them. A fact, by the way, he used to, until very recently, have no problems admitting.
Where Linus has focused on the kernel, Stallman has focused on larger issues, and longer range visions. To me, Linus is just a guy who hacks well, and attracts other good hackers. That's a good thing to have, but it's nothing more than that. So when I want long range grasps of potential issues, I'm not looking for solutions from Linus, and he clearly isn't either.
However, I believe, the more on this I read, that this issue is not nearly as significant as Linus and his supporters are trying to paint it. The gpl 3 might negatively affect a few corporations who are trying to take as much advantage of the gpl 2 as possible, but who could give a sh#t about any long range principles, but why should anyone care about them? The kernel would do fine without them, and they would soon find that their opposition was as silly as it was against the gpl 2, before they saw the light.
They just want to minimize risk and maximize profit, and oddly enough, that's the entire point Linus and the kernel guys also are making. Although in the kernel guy's case, risk equals risking losing corporation x or y as a code contributor, and profit equals getting more code. Like I said, it's not surprising when you absorb the values and concerns of the people you work with and around day in and day, believing that you can avoid this is just plain naive. But there is a way out, and it's to recognize this limit, and to accept it, while still hacking away to your heart's content. But that means putting your ego in check, and I think that's the true, core problem that Linus is having today.
You will never find the core of Linuses objections in anything he says, in my opinion, he simply does not have the ability to see that core any longer, that's what it looks like to me anyway. His comments demonstrated that very clearly to me, and mundoes only served to demonstrate that point in a slightly more subtle and less inflamitory way.
The political stuff I referred to also didn't seem to register I'm sad to say, so I'll say it again: supporting the status quo of current corporate values is an inherently political act. Corporations are part of the political system, they influence it, they set policy when they can, which is pretty often. Pretending this doesn't happen is incredibly naive, but that's again what the kernel guys are claiming. This is what happens when you lose the ability to have an overview of yourself and your environment, and it's happened here.
The reason kanotix for example cannot discuss certain topics here is direct result of this corporate political activity. Not understanding this is a big problem, but it does require some insight into how modern politics actually work. So the 'pragmatic' decisions made are in cases like this directly political.
Anyway, it's pointless repeating this stuff, it's obvious, it's easy to learn and understand, so if someone hasn't yet realized that corporations are directly linked into modern political life there is probably very little chance they will understand that just because I type a few words.
Anyway titan, I don't really want to argue points I'm not even making, that's not a very good way to spend time, so at least give a try to arguing the points I am actually making, then maybe we can have a meaningful discussion.
Re Stallman: the definition of a genius is essentially someone who can see more, and earlier, than others who had access to the same information. Geniuses tend to annoy really smart people, who aren't actually at that level, and of course, they also tend to just be plain annoying in and of themselves, and Stallman I'm sure is no exception to this rule. Plus it's just hard on the smart person's ego to have to admit someone else is way smarter than they are. And stallman is in my opinion way smarter than Linus. He sees further, his visions come to life. He even gets people to do the hardest parts of his job for him without having to lift a finger, such as the linux kernel.
From everything I've read of Stallman, including his bio, upbringing, etc, he very clearly is an absolute genius, although of course with few social graces. Linus isn't. He's just a very focused, very bright, engineer.
I respect visionaries far more than highly skilled engineers, I'm sorry to say, especially ones whose visions have turned out to not only be workable, but have resulted in changing the world. I also respect artists more than engineers, for the same reason. |
_________________
Read more on dist-upgrades using du-fixes-h2.sh script.
New: rdiff-backup script
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 22:17 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 1005
|
|
By the way, I really want to emphasize again, I think the kernel hackers are doing great work, watching it progess is really a cool thing, I just also think that they are beginning to talk about things that they seem increasingly unable to discuss objectively, or to even understand.
The simple solution would be for them to let go of their egos and say: we don't care about visions, we'll let stallman handle that, it's worked great and taken us this far, so why should we change that relationship?
I don't mean not change the gpl, I mean not change trusting in the essential vision stallman and moglen created with the gpl 2. Obviously, history proved Stallman's ability to see ahead very well, so I'd personally just keep trusting it. But I do now see why Stallman has so little trust and liking for Open Source versus Free Software, he can see how little attachment they have to the actual core values, and how happily they'll compromise just so they themselves can 'keep having fun'. Not to say you shouldn't have fun, but it's not a sin to both have fun and have fundamental core values and beliefs, both at the same time. |
_________________
Read more on dist-upgrades using du-fixes-h2.sh script.
New: rdiff-backup script
Zuletzt bearbeitet von h2 am 26.09.2006, 22:32 Uhr, insgesamt ein Mal bearbeitet
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 22:24 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 02. Mai 2004
Beiträge: 471
Wohnort: Portland, OR, USA
|
|
|
Swynndla hat folgendes geschrieben::
So what do people think debian will end up doing? ...
If this dispute isn't settled amicably, my hope is that the Debian team will strip out all references to "Firefox," come up with a new name, and continue on as before. In other words, have a default browser that is all Firefox except in name.
One of the things that's so interesting about this dispute is that it hasn't come up before. What if the authors of other popular open-source software made the same demands?
"Attention: You can only call it The GIMP if you submit all your distro-related modifications to the GIMP sources to us for prior review; and note that our GIMP logo is protected by copyright and trademark laws and cannot be used or modified under any circumstances by anyone without our permission. If you wish to include The GIMP in your distro, you must not only call it The GIMP, you must also use our proprietary logos."
What a mess that would create. This is a bad precedent. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 22:36 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 1005
|
|
eco2geek, thanks for bringing this back ontopic, lol... that's exactly what the debian guy I quoted said too: why now? this is unprecedented. What gives?
This is really a very simple issue, as you noted, the gimp, apache, the linux kernel, these are all names that are known and trusted, and for some reason each is able to allow what mozilla will not allow. What that mike guy does is try to hide behind technicalities and BS to avoid this core question. And of course, the core question is really the actual issue, not some legal crap that shouldn't even have entered into the discussion in the first place if this was an interaction between adult human beings, which it apparently was before the mozilla corporation and their mike droid decided that it was time to clamp down to minimize threat to a potential profit center, which is what this really appears to be all about. |
_________________
Read more on dist-upgrades using du-fixes-h2.sh script.
New: rdiff-backup script
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 22:54 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 05. Okt 2004
Beiträge: 2069
Wohnort: w3
|
|
|
Zitat:
And of course, the core question is really the actual issue, not some legal crap that shouldn't even have entered into the discussion in the first place if this was an interaction between adult human beings, which it apparently it was before the mozilla corporation and their mike droid decided that it was time to clamp down to minimize threat to a potential profit center, which is what this is all about.
Hehe, in my humble and rude way I have already simplified all that to the same point 2 pages earlier. However, please don't stop - I really love to listen to intelligent discussions - since I was a little boy, actually. 
Greetings,
Chris |
_________________
"An operating system must operate."
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 22:56 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 1005
|
|
| Just my way of saying I agree with you 100%, heh heh, and always appreciate it when you come in and post your views, since they seem to cut right to the heart of matters without the extra words I seem to require. |
_________________
Read more on dist-upgrades using du-fixes-h2.sh script.
New: rdiff-backup script
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 26.09.2006, 23:53 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 02. Mai 2004
Beiträge: 471
Wohnort: Portland, OR, USA
|
|
Sorry, Chris, I was too distracted by your current avatar to read your comment.
Here's my DFSG-compliant suggestion for Debian:
 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 27.09.2006, 01:48 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 26. Jun 2005
Beiträge: 389
|
|
| Ever since Chris got into the discussion I can't get the name "Debbie does Firefox" out of my head. I'd like to propose a logo but it might go the way of some infamous multimedia player. Heck, you can even have the tagline "Some problems just need to be fscked". |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 27.09.2006, 10:52 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 07. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 526
Wohnort: Waliser Märze
|
|
|
h2 hat folgendes geschrieben::
The political stuff I referred to also didn't seem to register I'm sad to say, so I'll say it again: supporting the status quo of current corporate values is an inherently political act. Corporations are part of the political system, they influence it, they set policy when they can, which is pretty often. Pretending this doesn't happen is incredibly naive,
Anyway titan, I don't really want to argue points I'm not even making, that's not a very good way to spend time, so at least give a try to arguing the points I am actually making, then maybe we can have a meaningful discussion.
h2, I understand the arguments but try to keep my posts concise and to the point which unfortunately may make my views look polorised.
Your posts do imply that the developers views on the GPL3 are influenced by their work environments ie the corporations that employ/sponsor them this may well be true but the fact is that now 29 developers do not want the DRM changes of the GPL3 included. So are they all unable to make a rational judgement because of their work environment, I dont think so. Your point is valid but just your supposition. From what Linus has said he will not be changing the licence from GPL2 anyway so the whole argument is a bit academic. You think Stallman is wonderful but I doubt very much you would want to use Linux as he proscribes it. Everything in life is a compromise. As unpleasant as the current arguments about GPL and Firefox are they are all part of the development of free software.
Incidently I don,t know whether it is intentional but I find your posts getting quite condescending, my posts may be short and to the point or even just plain wrong but never rude or personal. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 28.09.2006, 10:55 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 07. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 526
Wohnort: Waliser Märze
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 28.09.2006, 11:06 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 25. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 2133
|
|
| My suggestion: DebFox |
_________________
And I ain't got no worries 'cause I ain't in no hurry at all (Doobie Brothers, "Black Water").
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 28.09.2006, 11:32 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 07. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 526
Wohnort: Waliser Märze
|
|
|
ockham23 hat folgendes geschrieben::
My suggestion: DebFox
Interesting to see what they come up with, I think they have concerns about being too close to Firefox.
Dweb Debrowser Webian Debnet don't quite have that Firefox ring to them |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 28.09.2006, 19:53 Uhr
|
|
Team Member
Anmeldung: 03. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 1544
Wohnort: out there somewhere
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel: Gnuzilla & Iceweasel it is, apparently
Verfasst am: 05.10.2006, 19:23 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 18. Apr 2004
Beiträge: 222
|
|
http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/
I was surprised that the moz suite is going to continue... I just recently and very reluctantly gave up my moz suite for Firefox & Thunderbird as I heard the suite was never going to be updated. I miss having everything together under one roof, so to speak. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel: RE: Gnuzilla & Iceweasel it is, apparently
Verfasst am: 05.10.2006, 20:36 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 08. Dez 2005
Beiträge: 300
|
|
| Seamonkey is the replacement for the Moz Suite |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
