Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

opensource.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 334 posts

Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

#311

Post by ladyanita22 »

bogwog wrote: post #164
ori_b wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The new Edge, Opera, and Brave are based on Chromium Largely because Google has pushed enough complexity into the browser that maintaining a browser engine is unaffordable, so you use Chrome as is. Have any of these projects successfully managed to contribute meaningfully, or are they just adding alternative window trimming to chrome?

And the Android in China example doesn't really say much because because the only way that was possible was through the forceful intervention of the Chinese government. Nowhere else in the world is there a market where Android is free from Google's iron grip, outside of tech enthusiast/hacker circles.

Amazon and their line of Fire and Echo devices.

Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

#312

Post by garaetjjte »

ajanicij wrote: post #216
dhodell wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of unfortunate because existing developers have the privilege of experience with the systems and where they're going that external contributors simply don't have, and it will take a non-trivial amount time for interested parties to develop that knowledge. At the same time, it is an active project with active development that are informed by goals and processes not all of which are open. And really, while th…

> However, the "bazaar" is also a bit of a myth in this regard. I'm not really aware of any open source projects where I can go submit a PR without talking to anybody and have the expectation that it'll be merged without discussion. I am aware of one, but an important one: ZeroMQ. Thanks to the late Pieter Hintjens, this project has C4 model. I have not seen any other project where I submitted a PR and maintainer acc…

That one is fun

>16. Maintainers MAY merge incorrect patches from other Contributors with the goals of (a) ending fruitless discussions, (b) capturing toxic patches in the historical record, (c) engaging with the Contributor on improving their patch quality.

https://rfc.zeromq.org/spec/42/

Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

#313

Post by lern_too_spel »

zepto wrote: post #292
fomine3 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WebKit is open source but Safari isn't meanwhile Chromium is. WebKit is sometimes a bit closed until it reaches embargo that Apple sets. But anyway Safari is good to web diversity.

I never said Safari was open source. What I did say is that Chromium was based on WebKit and then a fork of WebKit, blink. Let’s not credit Google for Chromium without recognizing that it was Apple’s open source work that made it possible. To suggest that WebKit isn’t open makes no sense at all. It may not have a governance model or development processes people like, but the fact that the source is open and has been…

Nobody suggested that Webkit isn't open. You have a nasty habit of putting words into other people's mouths.

It seems like you agree with the person you originally responded to, who noted that Chromium is an open source browser, and Safari is not.

Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

#314

Post by lern_too_spel »

zepto wrote: post #309
lern_too_spel wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're essentially suggesting that Android should have Tor built in. The point is that it's possible to use other push services on Android and has been done, just like it is possible to use Tor on Android. There is no reason that AOSP itself needs to implement Tor any more than Windows or AOSP needs to provide a push API. Both are possible to implement on top of the platform and have been implemented on top of the pl…

Why are you talking about iOS? Also who said anything about Tor? What relevance does it have? Of course any open source project can have features added in private. Those are not part of the platform. It’s certainly not true to say those features already exist in the platform, as you falsely tried to claim upthread. It also doesn’t mean you can add them to the platform if the maintainers don’t accept them. As I say, y…

Push messaging is a service, just like anonymous proxies are a service. It doesn't make sense to put them into a platform if they can be built on top of the platform. It would make sense to put something like this into iOS because it can't be built on iOS. It doesn't make sense to put it into AOSP.

Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

#315

Post by zepto »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #313
zepto wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never said Safari was open source. What I did say is that Chromium was based on WebKit and then a fork of WebKit, blink. Let’s not credit Google for Chromium without recognizing that it was Apple’s open source work that made it possible. To suggest that WebKit isn’t open makes no sense at all. It may not have a governance model or development processes people like, but the fact that the source is open and has been…

Nobody suggested that Webkit isn't open. You have a nasty habit of putting words into other people's mouths. It seems like you agree with the person you originally responded to, who noted that Chromium is an open source browser, and Safari is not.

“Nobody suggested that Webkit isn't open.”

Yes, they did:

“WebKit is sometimes a bit closed until it reaches embargo that Apple sets.”

Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

#316

Post by zepto »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #314
zepto wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you talking about iOS? Also who said anything about Tor? What relevance does it have? Of course any open source project can have features added in private. Those are not part of the platform. It’s certainly not true to say those features already exist in the platform, as you falsely tried to claim upthread. It also doesn’t mean you can add them to the platform if the maintainers don’t accept them. As I say, y…

Push messaging is a service, just like anonymous proxies are a service. It doesn't make sense to put them into a platform if they can be built on top of the platform. It would make sense to put something like this into iOS because it can't be built on iOS. It doesn't make sense to put it into AOSP.

Earlier you said AOSP had a framework for push notifications, a statement found to be false when checking the links you provided.

Now you say it doesn’t make even sense to put this feature in the platform, confirming that you were lying when you said it already was part of the platform.

Why are you talking about iOS?

Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

#317

Post by bogwog »

ladyanita22 wrote: post #311
bogwog wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the Android in China example doesn't really say much because because the only way that was possible was through the forceful intervention of the Chinese government. Nowhere else in the world is there a market where Android is free from Google's iron grip, outside of tech enthusiast/hacker circles.

Amazon and their line of Fire and Echo devices.

Those aren't phones or general purpose computing devices (except maybe the tablets)

You could count those, but I don't consider them relevant the same way I don't consider those cheap chinese TV boxes, smart watches, fridges, and other appliances to be relevant here (they could just as well be using Windows 98)

Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

#318

Post by tesmar2 »

evgen wrote: post #288
quadrangle wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a fuzziness to the concept of monopoly. It doesn't have to mean the absolute version where no alternatives exist at all. It can (and legally does) mean that a business is so dominant that it can effectively dictate the terms of the market. Google has a search monopoly effective enough that they can solely make or break anyone who relies on search. They have enough dominance in the market that if they were to…

As a simple example of this, let us imagine for a minute that Amazon and Google go to war. Google drops all search results that point to Amazon products or products in the Amazon marketplace and direct those searches to competitors and competing marketplaces. Google also changes Chrome so that entries into the url bar that are not explicitly for amazon domains do not match or return any amazon domain or product. Sinc…

Google would lose a lot of customers if they did that. If that's ok with them, it's their business to drive into the ground.

Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

#319

Post by fnord123 »

dhodell wrote: post #295
fnord123 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, the "bazaar" is also a bit of a myth in this regard. I'm not really aware of any open source projects where I can go submit a PR without talking to anybody and have the expectation that it'll be merged without discussion. Bazaar is not a myth at all. The distinction was never 'are patches always merged' but is the development done in public. The issue with Google projects is more about in-group and out-gro…

I agree with you. My point here was exactly that is not how a bazaar model functions. Hence the use of "in this regard."

But it comes from observing what the Linux community did and giving it a name. It wasn't an ivory tower meditation but a field observation. I don't know how one can then turn around and say that it is not how the model works. Was the original observation incorrect?

It might sound like I'm being pernicious but I think fuchsia is great tech and I want it to succeed. I feel compelled to cheer you on in seeing the bazaar model as very real and good thing to pursue.

On the topic of more community engagement... despite Zircon not being an outright microkernel, maybe it's still appropriate for someone in the Fuchsia community to submit a talk to the FOSDEM 21 Microkernel devroom

https://fosdem.org/2021/schedule/track/microkernel/

Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model

#320

Post by 205g0 »

e12e wrote: post #139
205g0 wrote: post #65

OT: Just a second ago, I was setting up unattended-upgrades for security updates for a new Ubuntu box and I am once again puzzled why the largest Linux distribution has such an underwhelming UX for an crucial feature. Long story short, I welcome any new contender in the OS space.

What's underwhelming about?: sudo apt install unattended-upgrades

You have to touch two config files. One is easy but the other one needs a bit of googling, nothing major but yeah why at all this? Auto-updating security updates should be the default if you run servers in the wild.
Post reply on HN