Can we replace the 3rd party repo for Google Chrome (not open source) with Brave (open source, mpl2)?

[frankjunior (olumolu)]

@dalto

He isn’t wrong, it seems more likely that you aren’t familiar with their history. Replacing ads with their own ads was brave’s original business model. Only it didn’t go over very well for obvious reasons. So they then shifted more fully into their crypto model. But that also had too limited of an audience. Then they decided they could get more traction if they focused on privacy and security and overnight the product marketing changed to be focused on that angle.

that can also be true. also remember which is awful and wrong is its affiliate scam with adding its own referral endof signup url.

i know some stuff and i also know but this is what we have but still compared to what we have brave is a good choice.whatever the way they used to do business but they no longer doing this anymore. now if you look into every brand have done many wrong thing over its course just a example https://news.bloomberglaw.com/privacy-and-data-security/google-to-pay-23-million-in-search-terms-settlement-with-users

@dalto

Couldn’t is be in the actual repos if a packager wanted to package it? Is there anything blocking that from a legal or policy perspective?

if it is something legal or something i will ask it to brave about.
and i think it could be in default repo i didn’t find anything from stopping but what i know to be in the repo of fedora it need to be compiled with Fedora’s guideline of making rpm but whatever i know compiling anything chromium base is hard and takes lots of time and power to compile comparing to other projects so i don’t think there will be a maintainer who will do it. so the easiest way is just add there own repo after some testing if it works and does not conflict with anything i have used it it never conflict with anything but still need testing.

[frankjunior (olumolu)]

in the previous comment i told

@frankjunior

no this is wrong

please don’t mind about that.
now i have checked what you have questioned but what i have been seeing from brave is just a better chromium and it is nolonger that bad what it used to be. it allowing ads which are not intrusive or extremely targeted those ads are blocked and they show ads in exchange of crypto maybe 70 30 or so but it is user opt in. else it does not show its own ads. maybe they will once they have search engine ads.
so if we can seriously add that repo…

[dalto]

@py0xc3

identify if there is a packager who picks up that task?

Yes, indeed. My suggestion wasn’t intended to mean that someone should be required to do this. Instead I was trying to say that this request shouldn’t be different than any other time someone wants something packaged in the repos.

[joseph (Joseph Gayoso)]

Assuming a ticket has been made to the workstation WG, I think the question of adding Brave via a 3rd party repo can be cooled down until we get insight from them. Up to now the main argument for including Brave in this way has been on the merits of Brave as a browser, and Fedora going out of its way to support that 3rd party repo which we don’t have control over could be a step too far when another privacy-respecting option is enabled by default already (Firefox) and the most popular browser is also available. It seems like our bases are covered and we don’t need to extended ourselves further in the name of providing options. In my opinion, that’s why we have repos, so you can grab the applications you’re looking for. Not everything needs to be provided by default.

That being said, besides the question of enabling 3rd party repos or asking if someone would like to maintain that package, this might all go away with the approval of providing unfiltered Flathub as a 3rd party repo that can be enabled. If I understand correctly, Brave Software directly maintains the flatpak in Flathub. If this change is approved for Fedora 38, then you’d effectively have what @frankjunior is asking for of a 3rd party repo that can be enabled with Brave in it, only instead it will be all of Flathub and not just Brave. I don’t know how likely this change is to happen, but I think it would solve this discussion if it happens.

[vwbusguy (Scott Williams)]

@joseph

Assuming a ticket has been made to the workstation WG

This isn’t particularly new as Chromium copr builds have been a thing for a while, but #1 it has been incredibly difficult to package (@spot is a hero) and #2 there are plenty of landmines around patenting, etc. Brave is itself based on Chromium and, as such, ships with its own set of baggage and concerns on top of Chromium. Asking the workstation SIG to focus its efforts on packaging a difficult to package browser alone is a hard-sell, especially when the browser isn’t even one shipped with Gnome (epiphany) or one that already has rich support in the distribution (Firefox).

Honestly, I don’t think the current situation is a problem. I don’t know that I’ve ever heard of a case where a Fedora user found installing Brave to be difficult. They have a 3rd party repo and flathub is a thing. Ditto for Google Chrome. IMO, this seems like an already solved problem in that users who prefer these browsers can already install them with minimal effort and pulling attention from the Workstation team on this doesn’t seem useful. (I’m not sure what experience people commenting here might have on packaging and compiling a modern web browser, but it’s not for the faint of heart.)

Keep in mind, if Workstation was going to ship another browser, it would likely be Epiphany, but as Firefox remains extremely popular with Fedora users, I honestly don’t see that changing soon. That said, you can install Epiphany (aka Gnome Web), which is based on WebKit and is in the Fedora repos already.

[frankjunior (olumolu)]

@joseph

providing unfiltered Flathub

yes if it happens in f38 it will enable all that we can expect bydefault this will be there and no need for addition of repos required.
and as far i know chrome is also on flathub so it can also be removed that rpm 3rd party repo of chrome.

[frankjunior (olumolu)]

@vwbusguy

you can install Epiphany (aka Gnome Web), which is based on WebKit and is in the Fedora repos already

i am already using it recently it was ported to gtk4 and libadwaita and extension support is now fully implemented and it is becoming a serious option for users how want a simple browser and look native across whole system.