4 ms·
Most of the post resonates well with me, but at that point > Ideally, this codebase would not be controlled by any single company. I'd love to see a common bro
by iforgotpassword 7y ago
Most of the post resonates well with me, but at that point
> Ideally, this codebase would not be controlled by any single company. I'd love to see a common browser engine controlled by an independent nonprofit foundation
I had a bit of a facepalm moment. This is exactly how Google started out: Chrome(ium) was built based on webkit, so basically there was a mini consortium where Google and Apple would work together. But that wasn't moving fast enough for Google's taste so they forked off blink so they could immediately do whatever they pleased.
- SquareWheel 7y agoThere's a lot you're glossing over there. For instance the split from WebKit resulted in 4.5 million of lines of code that could be deleted, reducing bloat. Apple could then do the same on their end. It was a relationship which ended on good terms. Your comment makes it sound like it was antagonistic.
- iforgotpassword 7y agoI don't know anything about the relationship back then. But moving faster and more flexibility was even among the reasons Google gave back then iirc. Anyways, what I tried to say was that it didn't work, and you gave a good example why the split was necessary. To me that just confirms that a "chromium consortium" wouldn't work.
- vortico 7y agoThis is also the facepalm moment for me. Yeah, let's just ask Google to make it an independent nonprofit foundation, because they are 100% certain to say yes. If this is the point of the whole article, I'd have to concede that I fully disagree with the article's idea.