Talk:Gnuzilla

1st proposal
Four short articles, and the only interesting characteristic of three of them is the split from the official builds. These should all be merged into Gnuzilla for now until they're fleshed out a bit. Chris Cunningham (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Agreed. --mms (talk) 13:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * OPPOSE - Its unclear how Gnuzilla evolves, which is only a container name, the other articles are about seperate packages, articles will be expanded in the coming weeks. Mion (talk) 13:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * But what else is there to say about, say, IceDove? Is it ever going to be anything other than a rebranded Thunderbird with non-free components stripped out? I doubt that. Chris Cunningham (talk) 14:07, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * First of all it is not stated on the projectpage that IceDove is part of the Gnuzilla project (so far), and for your doubts, wait and see. Mion (talk) 14:14, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * If you know something that I don't, please enlighten me. Chris Cunningham (talk) 18:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

2nd proposal
On second thoughts, the merge should go to Mozilla Corporation software rebranded in Debian for IceDove and IceApe. I'll change the proposal. Chris Cunningham (talk) 18:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 *  Oppose  because Gnuzilla deserves his own article and I think it is easier to maintain Gnuzilla and Mozilla Corporation software rebranded in Debian separately. Think of the future! --mms (talk) 22:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No no no, I don't mean to merge Gnuzilla and Mozilla Corporation software rebranded in Debian: I mean to keep those two separate, but to add IceDove and IceApe to Mozilla Corporation software rebranded in Debian instead. Chris Cunningham (talk) 22:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, now I see. You want (IceCat → Gnuzilla) and (IceDove and IceApe → Mozilla Corporation software rebranded in Debian). Well, I don't know what to think about this proposal. Surely IceCat is the main product of the Gnuzilla project but why separate IceDove and IceApe from Gnuzilla? I would propose to either put all Ice* articles into the Gnuzilla article or into the Mozilla/Debian article. And I favor the first (also your first) proposal. --mms (talk) 23:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I think IceDove and IceApe are not part of the GNU project because one cannot find information about they in the GNU's website; they are Debian's projects and should be removed from the GNU template. The problem with merging Gnuzilla and IceCat is with the Infobox software, because they are two different applications. --Canaima (talk) 05:20, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose because "Mozilla Corporation software rebranded in Debian" is IceWeasel not IceCat which is developed separately by GNU; The two forks are independent of each other. GNU says Debian IceWeasel (Debian had the name first) and GNU IceWeasel are essentially independent derivations, and that's why GNU changed the name of the GNU version to IceCat. Linguaman (talk) 16:37, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Merge (2008)

 * Merge IceCat → Gnuzilla - Same subject. — Omegatron 02:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * support --Gronky (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Just go ahead and do it. After almost five months of discussing this issue, we've still got a half-dozens stubs where we probably need two articles at most. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I feel the Gnuzilla article should be merged into the GNU IceCat article for two reasons: IceCat seems to be the primary (only?) focus of the GNUzilla team at the moment and the IceCat page has more detail. --MentalNotes (talk) 08:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * While I dont think a merger is necessary because IceCat is not Gnuzilla. I agree with MentalNotes that Gnuzilla should be merged into Icecat if any merger is done. PrincessMeiLing (talk) 13:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Strongly Support --JackSlice (talk) 03:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose 74.176.37.155 (talk) 20:22, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Senseless Only-List article...
What is the purpose of this article? It contains nearly no content on the topic, but several screens filled with lists of navigation bars. Should I search them to find a better article about another product? That does not help when I search information about Gnuzilla. Nav bars as ends in themselves.

Instead of "spamming" links to other articles, more content on Gnuzilla should be added!

Or is there really nothing more to say? -88.130.65.85 (talk) 16:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Has Gnuzilla been discontinued?
This article is listed in Discontinued web browsers, but the rest of the article doesn't say anything about Gnuzilla being discontinued. So, has Gnuzilla been discontinued or not? Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 18:55, 3 November 2016 (UTC)