4 ms·

Question: What is Google's track record for where their open source releases end up over time? Genuinely not knowledgeable here

AlexErrant 14d ago
Well, they're not above forking their own project to patch security holes and never upstreaming the fixes. https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/117282080803799576 https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/117282080803799576 > Google should not be gatekeeping security patches to the standard Android platform code from Android OEMs but that's what they've started doing.
- surajrmal 13d ago
  There is an assumption that AOSP is how OEMs receive Android updates from Google. However I am not sure that is the case. GrapheneOS is perhaps a minority player due to lack of hardware which they can use to get into a partnership agreement and advanced access.
joemazerino 14d ago
Maintain it briefly then slowly let it die.
- hustwindmaple 14d ago
  more like create a big launch for promo, then maintain it briefly then slowly let it die
  - jandrese 14d ago
    That's not fair. Sometimes they kill it off quickly. https://killedbygoogle.com/ https://killedbygoogle.com/
- neuronexmachina 14d ago
  A recent example was the Google workspace CLI, which was maintained for just a month: https://github.com/googleworkspace/cli https://github.com/googleworkspace/cli
  - Mond_ 14d ago
    My understanding is that this one was never really "official", and that the guy who released it wasn't following standard procedures. That's not even the official Google github account.
  - verdverm 14d ago
    yet they "maintain" the pinned state on the org page https://github.com/googleworkspace https://github.com/googleworkspace
blazarquasar 14d ago
It depends on where they decide to go with it, I guess. Kubernetes, Go, Tensorflow, Chromium, gRPC are some examples that obviously went incredibly well.
- calebkaiser 14d ago
  Yeah I'm actually less hesitant to try out Google open source projects than I am new Google products. I have no idea if this is accurate or just my impression, but I feel like I've been burned by the "killed by Google" meme almost exclusively on their software products, whereas there are plenty of open source efforts from Google that I think of as stable. In addition to the ones you listed, I'd add the V8 runtime, Jax, Protobuf. Even some of their projects that wound up declining in market share (Angular, Tensorflow--both losing share to projects that wound up at Meta, ironically) are still actively maintained and pushed. But I'm sure there's also a huge graveyard of open source projects they abandoned that just never hit my radar. Still, at least with their open source stuff, you can fork in the worst case.
- accidc 14d ago
  Or if it becomes commercially valuable, then you can expect Google to take a third direction (embrace, extend, extinguish) : a la their current approach with android
  - surajrmal 13d ago
    I don't think that phrase means what you think it does. That only makes sense when there exists an open standard which a company builds an implementation for. Android was built from scratch and there was no standard.
- schainks 14d ago
  Don't forget `cgroups`, eh? That was a huge Linux contribution. or Android Open Source Project?

AlexErrant 14d ago

Well, they're not above forking their own project to patch security holes and never upstreaming the fixes. https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/117282080803799576 https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/117282080803799576 > Google should not be gatekeeping security patches to the standard Android platform code from Android OEMs but that's what they've started doing.

surajrmal 13d ago
There is an assumption that AOSP is how OEMs receive Android updates from Google. However I am not sure that is the case. GrapheneOS is perhaps a minority player due to lack of hardware which they can use to get into a partnership agreement and advanced access.

joemazerino 14d ago

Maintain it briefly then slowly let it die.

hustwindmaple 14d ago
more like create a big launch for promo, then maintain it briefly then slowly let it die
- jandrese 14d ago
  That's not fair. Sometimes they kill it off quickly. https://killedbygoogle.com/ https://killedbygoogle.com/
neuronexmachina 14d ago
A recent example was the Google workspace CLI, which was maintained for just a month: https://github.com/googleworkspace/cli https://github.com/googleworkspace/cli
- Mond_ 14d ago
  My understanding is that this one was never really "official", and that the guy who released it wasn't following standard procedures. That's not even the official Google github account.
- verdverm 14d ago
  yet they "maintain" the pinned state on the org page https://github.com/googleworkspace https://github.com/googleworkspace

blazarquasar 14d ago

It depends on where they decide to go with it, I guess. Kubernetes, Go, Tensorflow, Chromium, gRPC are some examples that obviously went incredibly well.

calebkaiser 14d ago
Yeah I'm actually less hesitant to try out Google open source projects than I am new Google products. I have no idea if this is accurate or just my impression, but I feel like I've been burned by the "killed by Google" meme almost exclusively on their software products, whereas there are plenty of open source efforts from Google that I think of as stable. In addition to the ones you listed, I'd add the V8 runtime, Jax, Protobuf. Even some of their projects that wound up declining in market share (Angular, Tensorflow--both losing share to projects that wound up at Meta, ironically) are still actively maintained and pushed. But I'm sure there's also a huge graveyard of open source projects they abandoned that just never hit my radar. Still, at least with their open source stuff, you can fork in the worst case.
accidc 14d ago
Or if it becomes commercially valuable, then you can expect Google to take a third direction (embrace, extend, extinguish) : a la their current approach with android
- surajrmal 13d ago
  I don't think that phrase means what you think it does. That only makes sense when there exists an open standard which a company builds an implementation for. Android was built from scratch and there was no standard.
schainks 14d ago
Don't forget `cgroups`, eh? That was a huge Linux contribution. or Android Open Source Project?