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

Changing how we develop Ladybird

ladybird.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 602 posts

Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird

#11

Post by AdamN »

armchairhacker wrote: post #8

Why don’t they take the Linux approach? A browser is like an OS. Linux continues to accept public contributions, through an esoteric process that discourages lazy contributors: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-pa...

The only problem with that nowadays might be that AI can do all the incantations that formerly acted as gates to contributors.

Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird

#12

Post by throwaway423454 »

"A browser runs untrusted input from the entire internet on the user’s machine, and one well-disguised vulnerability is all an attacker needs. We have already seen patient, well-resourced campaigns in open source to earn maintainer trust and abuse it."

Then the linux kernel is doomed. /s

Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird

#13

Post by delusional »

armchairhacker wrote: post #8

Why don’t they take the Linux approach? A browser is like an OS. Linux continues to accept public contributions, through an esoteric process that discourages lazy contributors: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-pa...

The Linux approach is under pressure too. Maintainers are beginning to warn about too many contributions and too much churn to review it all.

Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird

#14

Post by shevy-java »

Cool - how about fewer perma-bans on github for participating in discussions?

Also, as I have pointed out before, they seem to develop too slowly for a solid beta this year. You only have to look at the issue tracker and check for URLs not working or even crashing the browser. Ladybird may have gotten better in the last months, but imagine if 50.000 people are using it, you will see more bugs. How do they then handle bug reports?

Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird

#16

Post by shevy-java »

fguerraz wrote: post #4

I feel like the project just died.

Too early to say. Once they enter "we now accept everyone to use Ladybird as daily driver" then there will be the real test phase. And, IMO, only after that phase has started and continued for some months, perhaps even few years, can a final conclusion be made. If ladybird fails then the Google empire has won permanently. Skynet slop will then be under control of Google, just as they stole all the advertisement money.

Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird

#18

Post by pulsartwin »

This seems quite misguided and is sad to see. They have every right to do this, but I was looking forward to continuing testing Ladybird as it improves and contributing in the future. I hope servo stays open to contributions, as it seems like it's all we have left.

Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird

#20

Post by koteelok »

armchairhacker wrote: post #8

Why don’t they take the Linux approach? A browser is like an OS. Linux continues to accept public contributions, through an esoteric process that discourages lazy contributors: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-pa...

Linux has WAY more maintainers, and many of them just reviewed other people's commits for years. They had a crazy amount of contributions even before AI.
Post reply on HN