Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
FS#58586 - [firefox-adblock-plus] replace with uBlock
Attached to Project:
Community Packages
Opened by Oscar Garcia (ogarcia) - Monday, 14 May 2018, 07:25 GMT
Last edited by Eli Schwartz (eschwartz) - Monday, 14 May 2018, 16:41 GMT
Opened by Oscar Garcia (ogarcia) - Monday, 14 May 2018, 07:25 GMT
Last edited by Eli Schwartz (eschwartz) - Monday, 14 May 2018, 16:41 GMT
|
DetailsReasons:
- Is faster (see readme [1]). - Is more easy to setup. - Is more configurable (if you are a pro user). - It have cloud support to sync your settings. - It REALLY respect the GPLv3. - It has not an arbitrary ("partner paid") acceptable ads agreement [2] (for MANIFESTO see [3]). Project: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock [1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/blob/master/README.md [2]: https://adblockplus.org/acceptable-ads-agreements [3]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/blob/master/MANIFESTO.md |
This task depends upon
Closed by Eli Schwartz (eschwartz)
Monday, 14 May 2018, 16:41 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't implement
Additional comments about closing: We don't take package requests in general, certainly not for such ill-thought-out FUD.
We certainly won't forbid maintainers to maintain packages you dislike, without significantly better reason.
Monday, 14 May 2018, 16:41 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't implement
Additional comments about closing: We don't take package requests in general, certainly not for such ill-thought-out FUD.
We certainly won't forbid maintainers to maintain packages you dislike, without significantly better reason.
1) We don't have a policy of providing adblockers, we do have a policy of providing popular packages iff the maintainer is also interested in that package
2) Most of your points are press release statements that come from an obviously biased source. Many would hotly debate the "easy", and the "faster" is just as bikeshedded (both whether it is significantly noticeable, and whether adblockplus is actually doing more).
3) adblockplus added support for Firefox Sync years before ublock did: https://adblockplus.org/development-builds/firefox-sync-support-added
But hey, power users could always host their carefully handcrafted filter lists somewhere and subscribe to that.
4) "more configurable" is less interesting than "how is it configured". If you're seriously recommending we remove packages from the repositories which work OOTB for most users, as a prerequisite for packaging something totally unrelated which fulfills many of the same goals in addition to providing some very high-maintenance alternatives to the popular-for-good-reason filter lists... I have to ask what's you'r point? Adblockplus works just fine in that respect. If you'd like to think of it like text editors, it's like saying we should ban nano from the repos because people should use the more configurable vim (yes, there are other justifications :p). Or to put the bias on the other side, it's like saying we should ban gedit from the repos because people should use the more configurable Atom.
4) You're complaining about "acceptable ads" (an opt-out feature that asks you on firstrun whether you want to opt out), which means you automatically lose points for FUD.
5) I've never heard the claim that adblockplus "doesn't respect the GPL", but it sounds shockingly wrong.
6) It is simply wrong, period, to ask us to "replace" one with the other. If a maintainer wants to maintain a ublock package they are free to. If no maintainers want to continue to maintain adblockplus, we can drop orphaned packages no one cares about. But those are completely separate issues. The packages can coexist in our repos just fine.