• BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        When that source, open or otherwise, is unilaterally controlled by Google, that doesn’t really mean much

        • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, it’s not. It’s open source and can be modified from Google’s baseline to be free of their restrictions by anyone who cares to put in the work, like Brave and Vivaldi.

          • buzzbald@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Are people able to make meaningful contributions to the project upstream to steer the direction of the web as an open platform?

      • Hypx@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        From what I understand, Gecko was a terrible engine from the get-go. It is also difficult to work with, and had a lot of idiosyncrasies that made hard to build anything that isn’t just a clone of Firefox. There’s a reason why Apple used KHTML as the basis of Safari and not Gecko. Even Brave is based off of Chromium, and the founder of Brave is one of Mozilla’s founders!

        So apparently no, Gecko is not it. We need something closer to a pure browser engine that is open source.