Just seems a little too light on added features for a whole fork. Maybe if the forker does as he says and implements other rejected features it might be worth it. Depending on what those features are.
Good luck to him.
Open Source
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
Thanks, the extra features expanded quite a big since you wrote the comment :) Suggestions are also always welcome
Is this fork going to keep up each time g∞gle decides to play cat & mouse? We're about due for another round.
I don't know the exact process, but I think its still based on the original, with the changes and additions on top of it. So it depends on the FreeTube team to keep up. I imagine its similar how the Firefox forks work, that still depend on the original Firefox.
I have set up a bot that automatically merges upstream code. I already released fixes earlier than FreeTube multiple times now. For example playlists that broke about a week ago are already fixed and released.
Sound like exactly what I have been wanting, though i will never use this fork for something so small and without a Flatpak.