Anyone ever thought of compiling Vivaldi against UG?
-
The relevant sources are here:
https://vivaldi.com/source/Although their HTML+CSS+JS frontend technically closed-source (as much as minified JS code can be, the rest is plain-text), it is irrelevant in this case since we are talking about the Chromium backend. Getting rid of built-in chrom* botnet and replacing with Ungoogled Chromium would be pretty nice, since Chromium itself has 0 customizeability. UG also proven to not going anywhere or being abandoned, it has been maintained for years.
-
@Kein also like pale moon it has the bus factor.
how many developers does UG have and i suspect it is another iron browser rip off. -
@Priest72 said in Anyone ever thought of compiling Vivaldi against UG?:
i suspect it is another iron browser rip off.
What does that even mean. Consider using google apriori?
-
@Kein I think is avoided for security reasons (0 days fixes) and to avoid (further) regressions as the UG code couldn't be "updated" as the latest chrome stable/beta code which still need to be patched.
Then Vivaldi use some g. features as the extensions updates, safe browsing and the spell check.I think taking some "patches" from these forks are considerable but would be easy to break something doing that and would be a lot of works for devs - which still must follow the chromium schedule.
-
I can honestly & sincerely reply... nope, i haven't.
-
@Hadden89 SpellCheck works though you need to fetch dictionary manually but that is no issue, same for extensions. Some Vivaldi functionality already realized as hidden extension, it is not particularly hard to implement both extension and dictionary fetch and update.
safe browsing
That's one of my problems with default Chromium. At least as of now they arent as bold to just shove down google API keys directly into Chromium as well (not liek they cant)
-
@Kein How many developers does UG have.?.
-
None, UG isnt a separate browser or fork of Chromium. It is a maintained by community's collection of patches that remove Google junk:
https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium/
Which makes it easier to be used in other forks and projects, for example both Bromite and Brave use most/some of it. -
I'd say Vivaldi developers could create test versions of Vivaldi compiled based on Ungoogled Chromium's repository to see if it would be viable to implement it into the main release versions. That is, if the devs will consider this to be a good idea to go with.
-
@supra107 thats all fine and dandy until UG goes tits up and then what,?
one man band are a struggle by nature . -
It's been around for 2+ year. Taking into account the fact that Mozilla (and Firefox consequently) is now ded, interest will be all-time high for it.
-
Forgot to add: I was talking in the hypothetical context of user-fork. Regarding mentioned here (for some reason) probability of "Vivaldi team" using the UG features: it is impossible due to
https://blog.samuelmaddock.com/posts/the-end-of-indie-web-browsers/
https://blog.samuelmaddock.com/posts/google-widevine-blocked-my-browser/Google will simply kill them. Ironic how it is, but they have complete control over "open-source" Chromium. V userbase is already tiny enough and without DRM support they will lose about ~70% of them. This kills the browser.
-
@Kein What I feared.
The only thing V can do is to make some g. services opt-out and mirroring some others (like the dictionaries), maybe even taking some "safe patches" but being VERY careful this will not break blink or its features like widevine or the extensions. Then UG are patches for chromium stable while vivaldi snapshot is (usually) on chromium beta. Not a big timeframe to test if the patch is applicable. -