Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I did not come to any conclusion. I called out a baseless claim.

A few pints about Ladybird:

* It's an awesome project, and they appear to be pretty efficient. * Greenfield projects always move faster than big codebases that are 30 years old. * Bigger teams always have more overhead than smaller teams. * Ladybird only does a small fraction of the things Firefox does. It's an important fraction, but still a small one. * The Ladybird GitHub repository has 1.3k contributors. Not sure where the number 10 comes from. * Only part of the people at Mozilla are engineers working on Firefox. There's also management, legal, marketing, HR and all the other folks you need to run a corporation. There's also engineers working on other products, backend services and infrastructure not required by Ladybird in its current stage.

None of the points above are quantitative, so Ladybird and Firefox are also hard to compare. I personally do think the Firefox org at Mozilla is pretty efficient for what it is; not based on the points above, but rather based on having worked at Mozilla for more than six years.

 help



If you have worked at Mozilla then clearly you are going to have a better understanding of the company than I do. But my perspective, and I believe of many others from the outside looking in, is that the company is mismanaged, focusing on the wrong things, and paying their execs way too much.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: