Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Status of google chrome and chromium

[jaromil]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256


> Guess I'll stick my oar in here.

hola Karl! :)

> > more on  Chromium / Iron:

On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 10:48:26AM +1030, Karl Goetz wrote:
> I forwarded a message about this  onto someone from this list on the
> 4th, guess I should have sent it here directly.

yes please! place feels cozy enough and very useful indeed.

> I saw the link a few days after it was published (benefit of knowing
> a chromium hacker ;)), so...

there is ppl around getting interested, quite natural as Firefox seems
to have passed its best days by now.

> I exported chromium  git (well... svn, but my mates  stuck it in git
> for his work) at various points, and diffed against Iron.

oh nice! is that a public git repo? i developed allergy to svn...

> du -hs Desktop/rev-iron-vs-chromium-*
> 365M  Desktop/rev-iron-vs-chromium-130b4651d.diff
> 351M  Desktop/rev-iron-vs-chromium-344bc62c.diff
> 365M  Desktop/rev-iron-vs-chromium-34b31da1.diff
> 394M  Desktop/rev-iron-vs-chromium-a615c2e8.diff

> These  are  reasonably average  sizes.  Smallest  I  got (about  8.5
> million  lines)   was  340MB,   largest  about  500MB   (15  million
> lines). The numeric id's before .diff are the git commit.

gosh.

> Surely we  only want  to host  a diff if  upstream isn't  willing to
> accept our changes?

sure. see below  my speculations about branding, however  when we talk
of serious code modifications that  people need for their privacy then
let's do  all what is possible to  have most eyes looking  at them and
deploy them in most places around.

> I'm told putting  Chromium into incognito mode does  most of what we
> want, and its  possible they would accept (build  time?) options for
> the others.

yep, build time opts would be sweet.

but  i'm not  satisfied by  incognito mode,  privacy is  a fundamental
right and not an option: the "incognito switch" commodifies what needs
to be there by default, while  in fact profiling should be an *agreed*
commodity. turning  the whole  thing around is  a very  dangerous step
while the user's perception of privacy is decaying...


Ali wrote:

> Even if the Iron developer was  serious with his scheme in that log,
> in my  opinion, it  doesn't put  his fork in  a worse  position than
> neither  Google Chrome  nor Chromium  both of  which come  with more
> privacy/ethics problems.

i also don't regard Iron's  developer stance at forking as bad per-se,
but we need to rationalise these privacy/ethics problems (anyone has a
summary and concrete analysis?) then  draw some lines of actions which
can include contribution and/or forking  - re-branding can't be bad if
it gets you some beers, since we don't get any from Google anyway.


ciao


- -- 
jaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org

GPG: B2D9 9376 BFB2 60B7 601F  5B62 F6D3 FBD9 C2B6 8E39


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
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=
=LZ3F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----