4 ms·

And how does that help with maintaining the current functionality that Google engineers are supporting? Presumably, the code that the Webkit team wants to remo

by cube13 14y ago

And how does that help with maintaining the current functionality that Google engineers are supporting? Presumably, the code that the Webkit team wants to remove is the interface with Chrome/Chromium. That's the easy part, in the grand scheme of things. The hard part is getting new people to pick up the features and functionality that was being worked on by people who have moved to Blink. That's going to be a huge challenge, especially for features that were half implemented.

DannyBee 14y ago
Sorry, but people and companies come and go from open source projects all the time. You act as if this is not the typical happening in an open source project. Just because it happens to involve a large company, or a well known project, doesn't change anything. Either the project will find/attract new contributors to support those features, or it won't. If it doesn't, it generally means it wasn't going to stay viable. Plenty of companies left GCC and left features unmaintained. They either find new maintainers, or get removed, and the project moves on. This is the life of an open source project. It's not like a divorce at all. It's like a large collaboration where people are free to leave at any time. When people leave, either the collaboration absorbs the loss, or it doesn't.
- tambourine_man 14y ago
  Sorry, but people and companies come and go from open source projects all the time. Yes, bad things happen all the time. Frequency doesn't turn a bad thing good though.
  - DannyBee 14y ago
    Uh? It's not necessarily bad or good for a company or person to leave. It all depends on whose perspective you are using (and i'm not talking about either the company or the project). Sometimes things are bad for one project, but good for an ecosystem. Or the reverse. Folks who started EGCS, including a company worth of folks, left GCC to do so. Was this bad for GCC? Most people with gut reactions thought it was "bad". It certainly ended up improving the state of the world, and in fact, later turned out very good for the GCC project because it got a much better GCC out of it. Basically, I think you may need a little perspective here.

by cube13 14y ago

DannyBee 14y ago

Sorry, but people and companies come and go from open source projects all the time. You act as if this is not the typical happening in an open source project. Just because it happens to involve a large company, or a well known project, doesn't change anything. Either the project will find/attract new contributors to support those features, or it won't. If it doesn't, it generally means it wasn't going to stay viable. Plenty of companies left GCC and left features unmaintained. They either find new maintainers, or get removed, and the project moves on. This is the life of an open source project. It's not like a divorce at all. It's like a large collaboration where people are free to leave at any time. When people leave, either the collaboration absorbs the loss, or it doesn't.

tambourine_man 14y ago
Sorry, but people and companies come and go from open source projects all the time. Yes, bad things happen all the time. Frequency doesn't turn a bad thing good though.
- DannyBee 14y ago
  Uh? It's not necessarily bad or good for a company or person to leave. It all depends on whose perspective you are using (and i'm not talking about either the company or the project). Sometimes things are bad for one project, but good for an ecosystem. Or the reverse. Folks who started EGCS, including a company worth of folks, left GCC to do so. Was this bad for GCC? Most people with gut reactions thought it was "bad". It certainly ended up improving the state of the world, and in fact, later turned out very good for the GCC project because it got a much better GCC out of it. Basically, I think you may need a little perspective here.