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

Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 481 posts

Re: Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

#401

Post by fsflover »

LadyCailin wrote: post #388
fsflover wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> generally reputable company Are you talking about Microsoft here? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft#Controversies

Hence the qualifier “generally”. I’m not saying they’re above reproach, but I am saying that companies that care far less about data security already have my phone number, such as most/all of my utilities - including my phone company. And those aren’t realistically optional.

> companies that care far less about data security already have my phone number ... including my phone company.

Far less than these?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40592789

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12305598

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Privacy...

This is unlikely.

Re: Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

#402

Post by voidspark »

OtomotO wrote: post #371
voidspark wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub is not Git. Git is by far the most widely used VCS. The majority of code hosting services use it.

Yes, I am aware. I didn't claim anything else. My clients don't use GitHub. Most of my clients do use Git. (some use other VCS) What made you think I thought differently?

Because the comment you replied to never mentioned GitHub. I thought you didn’t know the difference. Linus created Git.

Re: Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

#404

Post by selectnull »

fsflover wrote: post #400
selectnull wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are completely correct, my comment was shallow and that was my fault. Here is my opinion on Mozilla and their direction: in the previous decade (or a little bit more) or so their primary money bringer was Google, paying for the default search engine placement in Firefox. Annually, that brought about half a billion US (I don't have the exact amounts, but let's assume in that decade they should have earned a few bi…

> color me sceptic on that one. This is fair but not sufficient to declare "the last thing they want is good data protection laws". > it's all Chrome and iOS. > So, what has Mozilla done with the billions? This is also fair but has nothing to do with the data protection laws. > Instead they have sold their soul to the highest (and only) bidder. It seems they can't continue doing this, given the ongoing legal actions…

> This is fair but...

> This is also fair but...

Ok, so we can agree that my assesment is fair, but it remains to be seen how the data protection story pans out.

>> Instead they have sold their soul to the highest (and only) bidder.

> It seems they can't continue doing this, given the ongoing legal actions against Google. So let's see.

Just to be clear: I think that Mozilla should have taken that money (and possibly more) and *invest* in Firefox and build a rainy day fund (which are coming soon). Instead, they spent it on whatevers and done a layoff.

Re: Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

#405

Post by static_motion »

garganzol wrote: post #346
noobermin wrote: post #314

I guess the dream is dead. Even in open source, we have consolidation with no real hard monetary markets involved. EDIT: skimming these comments, I like how none of the top comments are talking about the bigger story here which is the move away from mercurial to git and instead everyone is focusing on github itself. This has essentially sealed hg away to obscurity forever. Do people not realise git is a program that…

I cannot imagine moving to Git from Mercurial. Git looks clunky from my perspective. Yes, it works too, but working with Git is a usability torture, sorry but it is true. I like some Git features better though, but not most of them.

I'm a pretty young developer and git is the only VCS I'm familiar with, and even though it has its quirks I find it quite powerful and a perfectly adequate tool for the job. In what way is Mercurial better?

Re: Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

#406

Post by vvillena »

mkesper wrote: post #124
baq wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't rewrite history in git, I don't want to bisect in your repos. If you push rewritten history to master, you're a git. Conclusion: learn your tools.

The modern workflow is just to let GitHub squeeze yor shit commits into one and then rebasing that.

The "squash everything" mantra turns git commit history into a series of snapshots devoid of any logical notion about how code evolves.

Squashed commits are strictly worse than plain, non-fast-forwarded merges from rebased branches.

Re: Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

#408

Post by Operyl »

thayne wrote: post #380
jgraham wrote: post #158

(I work at Mozilla, but not on the VCS tooling, or this transition) To give a bit of additional context here, since the link doesn't have any: The Firefox code has indeed recently moved from having its canonical home on mercurial at hg.mozilla.org to GitHub. This only affects the code; bugzilla is still being used for issue tracking, phabricator for code review and landing, and our taskcluster system for CI. In the s…

Given that Phabricator has been discontinued, are there any plans to replace that with something else? Phorge perhaps?

Both forks coexist and pull fixes from each other.

Re: Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

#409

Post by rstat1 »

LtdJorge wrote: post #377
jgraham wrote: post #158

(I work at Mozilla, but not on the VCS tooling, or this transition) To give a bit of additional context here, since the link doesn't have any: The Firefox code has indeed recently moved from having its canonical home on mercurial at hg.mozilla.org to GitHub. This only affects the code; bugzilla is still being used for issue tracking, phabricator for code review and landing, and our taskcluster system for CI. In the s…

Will GeckoView and Mozilla Android Components be on GitHub too?

I was gonna say they already were and had been for a while, but apparently a few weeks ago they moved back in to the main Firefox repo.

Which means I guess they're back on Github now.

Re: Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

#410

Post by probably_wrong »

static_motion wrote: post #405
garganzol wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot imagine moving to Git from Mercurial. Git looks clunky from my perspective. Yes, it works too, but working with Git is a usability torture, sorry but it is true. I like some Git features better though, but not most of them.

I'm a pretty young developer and git is the only VCS I'm familiar with, and even though it has its quirks I find it quite powerful and a perfectly adequate tool for the job. In what way is Mercurial better?

IMO Mercurial is (was?) more user-friendly.

Here's a quick example: when I create a Mercurial repository Mercurial doesn't say anything, while Git yells at me that it's using "master" as its branch name but I can change it with a cryptic command. After a first commit for a file Mercurial once again doesn't say anything, while Git gives me three lines of information including the permissions for the file I just added. Editing and committing a file in Mercurial with "hg commit" yields (again) nothing, while typing "git commit" in Git let's me know that it knows there's a modification but it won't go through until I "stage my change for commit".

Now, imagine you're a new user. Mercurial just did what I asked, and it even guessed that "hg commit" should mean "commit everything that's been modified". Git, on the other hand, has yelled at me about default branch names (what's a branch?!), file permissions, and bickered about me not staging my commit (what's a stage?!!). They both did the same thing but, for a new user, Mercurial did it in a friendlier way.

Post reply on HN