Would it be too much to ask various #Mozilla #Firefox forks: #palemoon #waterfox #LibreWolf #iceweasel etc to join forces and chart an independent path, not just for catching up in #browser tech, but actually developing it in the right direction?
As it is, browsers involve a lot of work: Sync services, multi platform support etc. As a user, the situation seems quite dire. Feels like we ought to pool our resources.
Not easy as every fork has different priorities and preferences.
@levi I just installed Librewolf, and it is obvious it is a soft fork; the Firefox branding is gone, and settings are set to more privacy-protecting defaults, and so far that seems about all. OTOH, there may not be much more than that needed...at least until Mozilla Corp bakes an ad engine directly into the browser.
I think getting a sync that is independent from Mozilla servers working on all Firefox / Mozilla-based browsers would be great. But we in Pale Moon don't want the sync server and client software (i.e. Sync 1.5 + FxA) used today by Mozilla, because it's not zero-knowledge and it seems to require a separate authentication server (which is where FxA or "Firefox Accounts" come in).
AFAICS it seems we're the only browser to have truly broken off from Mozilla in that front, by ripping out Sync 1.5 during the hard forking of 52 ESR and bringing back Sync 1.1 (aka Weave). Floorp and LibreWolf for example still use Firefox Accounts and haven't seem to change the sync server's URL, which therefore means Mozilla can still get access to the data you're syncing across devices, like bookmarks, passwords, open tabs, and history...
hmm I thought Palemoon was forked from an old FF a long ago and atm they do not follow Mozilla's development cycle at all but rather progressing independently (unlike Waterfox/Librewolf) š¤
I think you're right, but they forked Chrome instead, so it's a modified version of the Gecko engine. So unfortunately that also breaks add-on support:(
I totally agree with the OP that this energy would be better spent by joining forces with other projects.
nilesh
in reply to nilesh • • •As it is, browsers involve a lot of work: Sync services, multi platform support etc. As a user, the situation seems quite dire. Feels like we ought to pool our resources.
Not easy as every fork has different priorities and preferences.
Levi
in reply to nilesh • • •I think these are "soft" forks in that they're a reconfigured build to change some options, css, and include whatever plugin.
They're not committing code to improve functionality.
traecer š²ā
in reply to Levi • • •nilesh
in reply to traecer š²ā • • •Levi
in reply to nilesh • • •@traecer
No. You can re-enable the firefox sync options if you wish.
That's what I mean about soft forks. It's mostly css & build configuration - no one is coding a new sync platform.
Job Bautista
in reply to nilesh • • •I think getting a sync that is independent from Mozilla servers working on all Firefox / Mozilla-based browsers would be great. But we in Pale Moon don't want the sync server and client software (i.e. Sync 1.5 + FxA) used today by Mozilla, because it's not zero-knowledge and it seems to require a separate authentication server (which is where FxA or "Firefox Accounts" come in).
forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.pā¦
AFAICS it seems we're the only browser to have truly broken off from Mozilla in that front, by ripping out Sync 1.5 during the hard forking of 52 ESR and bringing back Sync 1.1 (aka Weave). Floorp and LibreWolf for example still use Firefox Accounts and haven't seem to change the sync server's URL, which therefore means Mozilla can still get access to the data you're syncing across devices, like bookmarks, passwords, open tabs, and history...
nickelson
in reply to nilesh • • •LPS
in reply to nickelson • •I think you're right, but they forked Chrome instead, so it's a modified version of the Gecko engine. So unfortunately that also breaks add-on support:(
I totally agree with the OP that this energy would be better spent by joining forces with other projects.