4 ms·

Webkit has 246,027 commits gecko has 782,002 commits chromium has 1,080,253 commits To help you understand the magnitude/impact of this difference, a single

Webkit has 246,027 commits gecko has 782,002 commits chromium has 1,080,253 commits To help you understand the magnitude/impact of this difference, a single 100K commit difference account for more human resources than a whole native GUI framework (e.g cocoa, gtk 72,090 commits, QT ~80K) has received in its lifetime now multiply that by 8 and you get an idea of how obscolete webkit is regarding human resources. They might ? have hired more devs recently but if true, it's already a decade too late. finally the gradient is not closing.. ten time less weekly commits: https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/pulse https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/pulse https://github.com/chromium/chromium/pulse https://github.com/chromium/chromium/pulse

saagarjha 5y ago
Are you seriously going to make an argument on the relative investment each browser engine gets based on how many commits they have?
- The_rationalist 5y ago
  Are you seriously gonna ignore that pulse also shows the diffs (additions/deletions) and that corroborate with commit rate. Moreover I have expertise in web features, i have read a big chunk of chromestatus.com features and the gap between chromium and webkit is even bigger than the gap between chromium and gecko. Finally the most meaningful metric is: webkit: ~60 developers worked on it this week, chromium: >700 developers The gradient gap is pathetically big