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

Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

bugzilla.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 196 posts

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#51

Post by fredoralive »

sp332 wrote: post #32
maqr wrote: post #22

What's the best way to make this more prominent for Mozilla to see? I made a bugzilla account and added my name to the CC list, but is there anything else I can do to help this get more recognition?

It hasn't even been triaged yet. I'd wait to see what the devs' initial response is before worrying that it's not getting attention. Edit: ah, here we go https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1172126#c2

I do love the way Mozilla basically say "Bugzilla isn't the place to discuss things like this, you should discuss this down in Usenet, behind the sign that says 'beware the leopard'" for any controversial decision.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#52

Post by dblohm7 »

RubyPinch wrote: post #29
Albright wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in my opinion, it's unnecessary bloat - just like that video chat thing they added a couple months ago. Remember when Firefox, the lean, scrappy browser, first came out and ran circles around the bloated Netscape browser/HTML editor/IM client/mail client/newsreader? The Firefox team seems to have forgotten. If anyone is maintaining a "Firefox: Browser Only Edition" fork, I'd love to know about it so I could…

icecat, follows gnu teachings waterfox, pale moon, also exist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers#Gecko-bas...

I know for a fact that Pale Moon stripped all test suites from their fork of the code. Any modifications that they have made to the browser are not fully tested. Caveat emptor.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#53

Post by dblohm7 »

fredoralive wrote: post #51
sp332 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It hasn't even been triaged yet. I'd wait to see what the devs' initial response is before worrying that it's not getting attention. Edit: ah, here we go https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1172126#c2

I do love the way Mozilla basically say "Bugzilla isn't the place to discuss things like this, you should discuss this down in Usenet, behind the sign that says 'beware the leopard'" for any controversial decision.

Umm, it has always part of the general Bugzilla etiquette guidelines. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette.html

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#54

Post by hackmiester »

cpeterso wrote: post #46
firasd wrote: post #18

This trend of Firefox increasingly bundling more services and features is an interesting paradox considering that Firefox started as a quiet project to make a slimmed down, no frills browser in comparison to the main Mozilla browser. I’ve recently resumed using Firefox as my main browser partly driven by support of the project but also because Chrome was taking too much RAM and causing performance issues. Of course,…

Phoenix/Firefox was Mozilla's own lightweight alternative to SeaMonkey. Then Chrome was the lightweight alternative to a memory-hogging Firefox. Now Chrome is seen as sluggish and a memory hog. Where do we go next?

...back to Seamonkey? :D

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#55

Post by gcommer »

dblohm7 wrote: post #38
IshKebab wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost certainly.

Mozilla employee here: That is incorrect. There is limited public information available about this deal, but the best quote so far is in this article: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2930532/reading-service-pocke...

This makes even less sense... I also assumed the Pocket integration was a paid placement, in which case I was fine having to spend the time removing the button and disabling it in about:config, since I saw it as a cost of actively developed free software (same with having to change my default search engine away from Yahoo all the time).

Integrating a third party API for free when plenty of browser-centric features are left as extensions makes me really question Firefox's goals.

How is elevating an arbitrary third-party service from an extension into native browser code "promoting openness, innovation & opportunity on the Web"?

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#57

Post by cpeterso »

wvenable wrote: post #49
cpeterso wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phoenix/Firefox was Mozilla's own lightweight alternative to SeaMonkey. Then Chrome was the lightweight alternative to a memory-hogging Firefox. Now Chrome is seen as sluggish and a memory hog. Where do we go next?

Servo, when it's done. And from there, who knows!

btw, browser.html is a Servo experiment with "future UI paradigms":

https://github.com/mozilla/browser.html/

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#58

Post by untog »

Puts wrote: post #26
MisterWebz wrote: post #5

It is so unlike Mozilla to introduce something like that, I ran a virus scan and checked what programs had been installed recently -- I assumed it had been put there in the same way that IE users used to get the Ask Toolbar installed. Exactly how I felt. What the hell were they thinking? I'm generally very supportive of Mozilla, I even supported their initiative to put advertisements on Firefox's start page. But bund…

You really start to wonder what pot they are smoking over there at Mozilla. Standard things you would expect from a browser, like a way to easily disabling javascript are apparently left to third-party extensions, because oh you don't want to bloat the browser. But hey, video conferencing on the other hand is such an essential part of the browsing experience.

Standard things you would expect from a browser, like a way to easily disabling javascript

That is very far from being an expectation of the average user.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#59

Post by [deleted] »

Puts wrote: post #26
MisterWebz wrote: post #5

It is so unlike Mozilla to introduce something like that, I ran a virus scan and checked what programs had been installed recently -- I assumed it had been put there in the same way that IE users used to get the Ask Toolbar installed. Exactly how I felt. What the hell were they thinking? I'm generally very supportive of Mozilla, I even supported their initiative to put advertisements on Firefox's start page. But bund…

You really start to wonder what pot they are smoking over there at Mozilla. Standard things you would expect from a browser, like a way to easily disabling javascript are apparently left to third-party extensions, because oh you don't want to bloat the browser. But hey, video conferencing on the other hand is such an essential part of the browsing experience.

[deleted]

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#60

Post by cpeterso »

fredoralive wrote: post #51
sp332 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It hasn't even been triaged yet. I'd wait to see what the devs' initial response is before worrying that it's not getting attention. Edit: ah, here we go https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1172126#c2

I do love the way Mozilla basically say "Bugzilla isn't the place to discuss things like this, you should discuss this down in Usenet, behind the sign that says 'beware the leopard'" for any controversial decision.

The Pocket conversation has moved from Bugzilla to the mozilla.governance list:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mozilla.governance/2PYq2w8te...

Post reply on HN