Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

If you the amount of features in Chrome and Firefox (just those in the standard, nothing extra), you would know "mature well to compete" is a long way away, if not impossible.

And I don't see any problem with forking. Tons of browser bugs were found, reported and fixed exactly because companies forked them. And remember that Blink is forked from Webkit.




I have seen IE's rise and fall. Netscape's rise, burn and rebirth as Firefox, saw Safari as a fork of KHTML and rise of Chrome.

Ladybird might be added to this list. It's not impossible. It'll be a winding and hard road to go, but it is not a path with no end.

You don't need to fork a codebase to fix its bugs. It's GitHub's workflow (fork -> PR -> merge). What I meant, as noted in this thread, is a hard and closed fork propelled with money and corporate greed, which eclipses the open and primary version and drown it in the process.

EEE'ing it, basically. This is why I prefer GPL (preferably V3+). If you want to improve it, it's open. If you want to monetize and EEE it, then nah. It's not allowed.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: