Moved goalposts. We have ways for products built on Chromium to disagree. That's part of why there are more Chromium browsers today than any other sort. What we don't have is a single product. Each makes choices and competes in the market. Products have engine choice too!
-
-
Replying to @slightlylate @RickByers and
Engine choice? Really? The only choice is, switch of Blink or be forced to WebKit on iOS. Mozilla has GeckoView in the works, but will be challenging to make it competitive unless it also ships by default on Android.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @marcosc @RickByers and
Any embedder can fork at any time. That's foundational to OSS and why we work so hard to keep the Chromium community open and healthy (aspersions of non-participants not withstanding). If we fail, they fork. We remember what pushed us to it and aspire to do better.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @slightlylate @RickByers and
Again, you can't say "fork any time". That's not realistic. It cost a squillion dollars and pain to do that. Look how screwed that mobile fork of Gecko is right now... they are stuck on a super old version of Gecko unlikely to ever update. It's not feasible for small players.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @marcosc @slightlylate and
You cannot look at a Chromium fork the way you’d look at the fork of a different project for multiple reasons:
it’s a corporate project, so most of the community’s loyalty is to its employer, not to the project itself, hence you’ll have to rebuild a community from scratch.1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Market share of the Chrome browser creates de facto standardization, which means forks need to maintain feature parity with Chromium to stay relevant.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This implies either doing a soft fork (and dealing with the brutal pain of merging upstream changes) or maintaining feature parity by implementing everything yourself (which even Microsoft didn’t have the resources to do).1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
So in truth, you’re not really able to fork the project unless you’re ready to either softfork (and have your hand tied for any kind of large structural change) or build a team the size of Google’s to keep up to date with it.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
And by the way, this is not judgmental of how Google is handling Chromium. Google’s entitled to run its project as it sees fit.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
It’s just pointing out that realistically, a fork with a chance of survival would require more resources than other players have available, probably even collectively.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
This is a *comically bad* argument when you back-of-the-napkin the size/balance sheets of the players involved
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.