5 ms·

Is it possible to fork and develop Firefox with organization similar to how the Linux kernel is developed?

• zamalek 6y ago
  The Linux kernel has contributors from Redhat, OEMs, etc. There unfortunately isn't that type of interest in FF.
  • surround 6y ago
    What about Debian?
    • bad_user 6y ago
      Debian could hardly maintain their Iceweasel fork, and all they did was to change the branding. People seriously underestimate how much effort there is in developing a browser these days. Let’s be honest, if Mozilla goes under, Firefox is dead, because it takes companies like Google, or Apple to develop and maintain a browser. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_software_rebranded_by_Debian#Iceweasel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_software_rebranded_by_...
• johannes1234321 6y ago
  In theory: Yes. In practical terms: Hardly. Getting a large enough group of contributors is hard. For Linux this works since it was built over decades and contributors come from variety of backgrounds (students who want to learn, hardware companies who want to have support of their hardware, users who want it to be fast, companies which want to make it sort of a product (distributors etc.)) For "end user" software like firefox this is harder. In the kernel a contributor can start by providing a self contained device driver. Such a concept doesn't exist in a browser in similar form. From such a driver the kernel contributor can grow into neighboring subsystems. Google decided to go with Chrome. Microsoft jump on their ship and is unlikely to switch, again. Who else could push this? Facebook (would we like that!?), Twitter, Amazon?
  • zodzedzi 6y ago
    Agreed in principle. It's my primary browser and it seems to me that it's already in good shape (technically, and feature-wise). And the project is not starting from scratch. So if the financial incentives aren't there yet, and the only remaining value that Firefox provides is privacy and user freedom (along with good but not perfect performance), I'd imagine the FSF could be interested in managing something like this. And can maybe start with part-time volunteers.
    • johannes1234321 6y ago
      > And the project is not starting from scratch. This makes it even harder from my p-o-v. Most contributors want to create something new and not maintain old legacy, grown over a few decades. Diving deep enough is work and might happen once in a while for a bug which is a pain for somebody curious ... but tough sell.
  • martin_a 6y ago
    I'm most probably somewhat naive here, but if you could fork the latest release, remove all Pocket, VPN, whatnot stuff and just give me that as a build, I would be totally fine with it. I love the core product, I really don't need any of the fluff around it.
    • johannes1234321 6y ago
      And then security patches have to be applied (a language runtime with full network access is an attractive target) Also I would ask them to follow and participate web standardisation, else we end up with a Google web. See also https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Web_browsers_based_on_Firefox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Web_browsers_based_... for different attempts to do something independent.
      • martin_a 6y ago
        See the other comment: I would have hoped that removing "modules" like Pocket would be easy enough so it would be feasible to maintain a "Firefox Light" version.
• srtjstjsj 6y ago
  How could someone with less funding and knowledge than Mozilla do better than Mozilla? The Linux kernel isn't forked.