It looks like the main repository. The “How to submit a patch” mentions even the github repository. Even though it does not accept pull requests it seems to be not just a mirror.
I was about to reply with a “oh, really? Whoops, I maybe should I have looked a little deeper” and edited for the post title, but I’m not so sure, looking into the first link you posted.
RE: phabricator…I don’t know what that service is or is for, so I can’t comment if there’s any proof therein.
But the “how to submit a patch” page linked has a section that seems to at least suggest that their Github repo is now first-class, per the first line of the section.
Phabricator was an alternative for a development platform of sorts; development ceased in 2021. They’re still running here and there, but I expect them to be in the process of being deprecated.
RE: phabricator…I don’t know what that service is or is for, so I can’t comment if there’s any proof therein.
The how to submit a patch section documents that that’s where they accept patches. And they do their reviews and change iterations there. By necessity, that also means hosting/having the repos.
That’s confusing to me.
They only accept patches on Phabricator, have the sources there, but suggest using GitHub, but afterwards Phabricator to submit the changes?
I can only imagine it’s to lower barrier to entry because GitHub is more well known. But this just seems like a confusing mess to me, without clear wording of intentions and separation of concerns [in their docs, not your post or comment here].
That’s a read-only mirror, not a “move onto GitHub”.
PRs get automatically closed, referring to the contrib docs.
It looks like the main repository. The “How to submit a patch” mentions even the github repository. Even though it does not accept pull requests it seems to be not just a mirror.
When I searched for text “github” I did not find anything. But searching in the inspector to cover urls:
Which makes it all the more confusing. Stored there, but patches only elsewhere?
Really, for a “moved their sources” claim I’d prefer some form of announcement or docs that describe this.
I have searched a bit more. The transition is in process since 2023. [1] I don’t find any announcement though.
It looks like the process is now finished and the github repository is now the official main source. There are other news sites claiming this. [2]
[1] https://glandium.org/blog/?p=4346 [2] https://www.phoronix.com/news/Firefox-On-GitHub
I was about to reply with a “oh, really? Whoops, I maybe should I have looked a little deeper” and edited for the post title, but I’m not so sure, looking into the first link you posted.
RE: phabricator…I don’t know what that service is or is for, so I can’t comment if there’s any proof therein.
But the “how to submit a patch” page linked has a section that seems to at least suggest that their Github repo is now first-class, per the first line of the section.
Phabricator was an alternative for a development platform of sorts; development ceased in 2021. They’re still running here and there, but I expect them to be in the process of being deprecated.
The how to submit a patch section documents that that’s where they accept patches. And they do their reviews and change iterations there. By necessity, that also means hosting/having the repos.
That’s confusing to me.
They only accept patches on Phabricator, have the sources there, but suggest using GitHub, but afterwards Phabricator to submit the changes?
I can only imagine it’s to lower barrier to entry because GitHub is more well known. But this just seems like a confusing mess to me, without clear wording of intentions and separation of concerns [in their docs, not your post or comment here].