search

intika / Librefox

Librefox: Firefox with privacy enhancements
https://librefox.org
Mozilla Public License 2.0
1.7k stars 91 forks source link

LibreFox has moved #125

Open BeatLink opened 5 years ago

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

Due to the halting of development on this repository, we have created a new, community run successor to LibreFox, called LibreWolf. Check out the new organization here! https://gitlab.com/librewolf-community

SuperRobinHood commented 5 years ago

LibreVixen (female fox). Or if Mozilla's still bothered by that, then maybe LibreHawk. Name's the least important though - should revive the project first.

petKitsune commented 5 years ago

Vixen sounds nice Icevixen?

don't know about LibreHawk something more like a chipmunk the power not to be seen Tamias 'Tamias sibiricus'

'should revive the project first' yup

Serkan-devel commented 5 years ago

Keep in mind that there are Firefox forks, like Waterfox or Palemoon for a long time already

shreyasminocha commented 5 years ago

Which is why we need @intika to update us on the status of things. We could come up with alternate names, but we need to know what the issues are. In my opinion, an issue with naming is unlikely because as @Serkan-devel said, there are other similarly named forks. Unfortunately, we aren't hearing from @intika, possibly because they have been gagged by Mozilla. If only we could get an update from @intika…

Does anyone apart from @intika have push access to this repo? I know that @intika entrusted some of us (myself included) with access to the @Librefox organization, but the main repo remains in their name (I think @intika eventually revoked our push rights from some of the other repos on the org). I'm not sure how this might turn out, but here's an idea: what if we create and maintain a fork of the main repo in the organisation? The option to create a repo in the org's name seems to be working for me (although I'm not completely sure). I would love if there were some way of verifying whether @intika will be coming back to this project, but in spite of our attempts, we haven't heard from them. It's been 4 months since their last commit or visible interaction with this repository. They seem to be active on GitHub otherwise. Odds are they have been gagged by Mozilla, but then again, we are in the dark as to what copyright issues there might possibly be. If we do choose to take this path, we should probably do our research and make sure we don't fringe on Mozilla's copyright(s). If @intika does eventually, return to this repo (I hope they do), they could merge this repo with the fork or vice-versa.

Edit: @Serkan-Devel seems to have suggested something similar in the past.

SuperRobinHood commented 5 years ago

I wrote Intika an e-mail a long time ago asking about this, and he didn't reply. He's probably not coming back then. I mean couldn't he at least reply privately?

shreyasminocha commented 5 years ago

@SuperRobinHood Nothing's private on the internet, of course, but I get your point. I once thought of writing to them too, but didn't.

He's probably not coming back then.

Sigh

Let me create a fork.

shreyasminocha commented 5 years ago

I've created a fork on the org. I've given @intika admin access, in case they return. I don't know the in's and out's of the project, so I'd like to give some other people write access so they can review PRs as well. How do I go about this?

Serkan-devel commented 5 years ago

One problem with directly forking a project is that Github won't show these forks in search results. And search through files on that repo won't be possible either image

shreyasminocha commented 5 years ago

@Serkan-devel Yes, and we can't add a link to the main repo either since no-one but @intika has push access to it.

Serkan-devel commented 5 years ago

Maybe one could clone the repo locally and push the fork as it's own repo, then migrate all the open issues from this repo to there

shreyasminocha commented 5 years ago

Let me contact support and ask them to switch Librefox/Librefox to 'normal mode', disassociating the repo from the fork. Can't delete the repo and redo since "Organization members can't delete repositories".

BoostRacerKing commented 5 years ago

Why can not you not completely rewrite the program so make your own then you did not need @intika anymore he will not come back anymore. But I think it's a bit brazen of him that he can not give at least one answer to us where the problem is

The name LibreVixen does not sound bad

gerroon commented 5 years ago

If you can devevelop this, just mirror it and start with a brand new repo and code base. There is no problem with that because the original devs clearly not in a position to communicate.

b16r05 commented 5 years ago

I don't understand how DCMA or this gag order works. I mean, aren't they supposed to let those accused know what the infringing part is and tell them what to do with it... use as is, attribute, don't modify, stop completely or whatever!~ This happened to the Gadgetbridge repo: https://github.com/Freeyourgadget/Gadgetbridge ... it completely went offline because a notice was filed and github blocked the whole thing, issues section as well (someone else's program's screenshots were used to discuss potential UI/UX solutions). Took a while, but things were cleared up, screenshots removed and the repo was restored completely.

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

If we do create a completely new organization, could we do it on gitlab? I do like the sound of LibreVixen as well by the way.

Serkan-devel commented 5 years ago

Gitlab.com is still poprietary but that might be a possibility

Serkan-devel commented 5 years ago

@shreyasminocha issues are currently disabled on your fork

shreyasminocha commented 5 years ago

@Serkan-devel Fixed.

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

Gitlab.com is proprietary? It runs on gitlab CE as far as i know

Serkan-devel commented 5 years ago

I doubt it ever ran CE though image

i2mo commented 5 years ago

LibreVixen (female fox).

Just want to bring up that "Vixen" (or Wixen, Wicksen) means "to wank" in german ;-)

BoostRacerKing commented 5 years ago

LibreVixen (female fox).

Just want to bring up that "Vixen" (or Wixen, Wicksen) means "to wank" in german ;-)

Ja aber schreibt man nicht Wichsen so ?

b16r05 commented 5 years ago

Vixen and Fork(en), LOL : )

Forking this project is fine, but, let's say things go smoothly for a few days/weeks... what is to say that Mozilla won't slap the DCMA/gag order again. So, that road will lead to the same place. My suggestion is to brainstorm a list of things that could have caused Mozilla to react in such a manner! Trying to identify the issue is very important... this is where everyone, our collective brains+research can help. Further, looking at other forks of Firefox and how those projects handled/avoided potential issues from our list could help! At least this way, we are creating a roadmap and systematically stepping through... because the road has mines (LOL) and we don't where they are!

elypter commented 5 years ago

I would try to avoid everything that could cause a tradmark issue but if mozilla sees "Librefox" as a threat then i assume they will try to go after anything they can. Mozilla doesnt want to protect their Brand but they want to kill projects that do not behave as they please. For that reason i want to suggest the option to move primary development over to a tor hidden service if that is feasable. not as a means to do something illegal but as an additional line of defense. a website and download on the normal web can be hosted by an independend party. this way the developers are safe and if the website is taken down it can easily be rehosted and mirrored somewhere else much like the Torproject itself.

b16r05 commented 5 years ago

Trademark -- okay, but how? There are other forks and have been going strong for a while.

"... kill projects that do not behave ..." - Okay, and how are we not behaving? This is where we need to come up with more ideas on where, what and how Mozilla sees this project as a threat. For example:

Stronger security / privacy: but they are already cherry picking features from the TOR browser Integrating addons into FF itself, thus, making some addons redundant?

... What else could be pissing off Mozilla?

What you say about going stealth... giving the finger to Mozilla (LOL) and following TOR project's workflow (develop and release) sounds okay, but, not if you don't have to.

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

Well, we could start by forking to Gitlab, and if anything, we can move to a self hosted instance once we have the resources. I've taken the liberty of going ahead and creating the repository here: https://gitlab.com/librevixen . Just message me with your usernames so I can add you.

As for the reasons firefox is angry, I'm not too sure. I believe firefox has a compile time option that should remove all trademarks and logos and so on. We could use that.

gerroon commented 5 years ago

See this fork of Iceweasel for Win, might offer some clue maybe? https://github.com/muslayev/iceweasel-win64

brainscar commented 5 years ago

@BeatLink please add me @brainscar

brainscar commented 5 years ago

@theel0ja @shreyasminocha @nhynes @yoasif @bogachenko @szepeviktor

Please give gitlab username to @BeatLink

brainscar commented 5 years ago

Thank you @intika for all your hard work.

szepeviktor commented 5 years ago

mine is the same as here https://gitlab.com/szepeviktor

Serkan-devel commented 5 years ago

What about the forked librefox repo though? And why on Gitlab?

b16r05 commented 5 years ago

I suspected that Mozilla is trying to becomes a very privacy conscious browser... with the TOR Uplift project... especially when there is money (Research Grants) involved... but this may not be it, even though it looks like their goals might overlap with this project.

https://www.ghacks.net/2019/05/09/firefox-might-get-a-super-private-browsing-mode-in-the-future/

Trademarks and logos issue is an easy fix. Mozilla's TOR Uplift project is a good project to watch.

Serkan-devel commented 5 years ago

Could development still continue here?

b16r05 commented 5 years ago

It is not a bad idea to have a GitLab mirror? (copy), just in case Github decides (is forced or asked) to block this project completely.

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

So guys, do you want to develop on Gitlab or here https://github.com/Librefox/Librefox? Thumbs up this message for Gitlab, down for here. In any case, whichever decision we choose, we should probably rename to Librevixen ASAP, and remove the "fox" from the name, as I believe that's what causing the issue. Also, I think the issue is also due to the fact that in the the readme, we portray ourselves as a modification of of firefox, and not an independent fork.

Serkan-devel commented 5 years ago

we should probably rename to Librevixen ASAP

I'd switch to anything that doesn't want to place misspelled "freefap" as an icon on my desktop. And even though I have a Gitlab account and can develop there, gitlab.com is just proprietary + freebait, hosted on Microsoft Azure (or they switched to google cloud already)

just in case Github decides (is forced or asked) to block this project completely.

Gitlab.com blocked some blocklist-repo because the people on that list reported it, so it's not bulletproof either

b16r05 commented 5 years ago

@BeatLink Excellent ideas on what could be causing the issue and how to fix them! I too remember the project feeling like "a modification of firefox"... when I first found out about it.

@Serkan-devel Yes, that is why some one needs to keep a copy offline as well.

Serkan-devel commented 5 years ago

I guess one can just git clone it.

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

Sorry to reopen the issue once again, and sorry for the confusion, Because the fork is still on the organization with the name "Librefox", we had to create a completely new organization called librevixen. It can be found here https://github.com/librevixen. Just message me here or https://github.com/librevixen/LibreVixen/issues/1 so we can add you to the organization. I'll also leave this issue open for future visitors.

elypter commented 5 years ago

i am also not happy about a name which means to wank in german

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

i am also not happy about a name which means to wank in german

Name's been changed to LibreWolf!

dimqua commented 5 years ago

@BeatLink Why not move to GitLab or Gitea/Gogs instances like notabug.org?

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

@BeatLink Why not move to GitLab or Gitea/Gogs instances like notabug.org?

We were thinking of doing that in the future. Our core issue right now, is finding an online CI/CD or build system. Both travis and gitlab CI/CD have timeouts that expire before the build can be completed. Without an online build service, everyone would have to compile LibreWolf from scratch.

dimqua commented 5 years ago

@BeatLink does building it from the source code have any benefits? Isn't it possible to just use unbranded builds as a base?

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

@BeatLink does building it from the source code have any benefits? Isn't it possible to just use unbranded builds as a base?

Those unbranded builds don't use our own naming scheme. The executable's name is still firefox and the profile folder it uses is still .mozilla, which might cause conflicts with an existing installation

dimqua commented 5 years ago

You could rename the executable as you wish.

the profile folder it uses is still .mozilla

Yes, but it uses its own profile folder:

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

Okay so I just downloaded it and tested it out.

Attempting to change the executable name results in: Exec failed with error: No such file or directory

And while a separate profile is created, it is still in the ~/.mozilla/firefox folder. which is problematic because we want to get as far away from Mozilla's branding as possible and to not have it affect an existing install of firefox in anyway.

So i still think we need to do our own compilation. Plus it will help with other privacy improvements such as compiling without telemetry and pocket and the like

dimqua commented 5 years ago

Do I understand correctly, that is (mostly) because of a possibility of potential legal threats?

BeatLink commented 5 years ago

Yes. While I do not know the full details, i understand that the reason LibreFox originally went into a hiatus was some issues related to copyright. As a result, while we continue this fork in intika's absence, we will aim as much as possible to distance ourselves from Firefox's branding and existing installations, to minimize any possible complications. Incidentally, this is a community run continuation. Should intika contact us to rejoin the project, we are happy to have them return (I'm learning this as I go, if I'm being honest with you)