OP said this:

>> is the suggestion that FF is too complex to properly fork without full time devs?

How many Chrome forks don't have "full time devs"? A lot of them (Vivaldi, Opera) aren't even open source!

The only one I can think of is ungoogled Chromium which is basically equivalent to this Firefox one in that the actual changes being made are miniscule.

I'm not OP, but you, in GGP, said:

>>>It's 20 million lines of security sensitive code. Of course it's difficult to properly fork.

Did you forget to switch accounts? Which is it? Easy or hard?

>Did you forget to switch accounts?

No, but nice accusation.

> Which is it? Easy or hard?

Could you spell out what the contradiction is, here? I said it's hard to fork both browsers, and then pointed out that the only real "community" ones are miniscule patchsets which pretty much exclusively delete code - that even then, the list is only one or two forks long for each browser - and the rest all have multiple full-time professional devs behind them.

The "contradiction", coincidentally the very same reason I wondered if you switched accounts, is your implication that the reasoning for the way things are is blindingly obvious, except for the exceptions obviously, but those are blindingly obvious too. Apologies, I didn't realize the rationale behind your posting; that straightforward explanatory paragraph clearly couldn't have been deployed without all the posturing, first.