Well, we have to start somewhere. But yes, I believe that liberating the service from its single source would be a very good step.
Best regards, David On 10/06/15 01:48, Zachary King wrote: > Then why the pocket branding and terminology? > > It would be one thing if this was marketed as a general way to save things > for later and Pocket just happened to be the only provider at launch with > a published goal/process for adding more services (Instapaper for example). > That is an entirely different message than "Here is Pocket (a completely > independent, profit driven, third party) now integrated into core Firefox. > > Having a dialog where you could add/remove/edit "save for later" providers > would go a long, way in my opinion, to curbing the anger about this. Some > of us use Firefox for the primary reason of them giving us choice. To be > totally frank, I prefer Chrome, but find Google as a whole kind of creepy. > I would like to think that there is still at least one browser I can still > trust. > > -Zach > _______________________________________________ > governance mailing list > governance@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance > -- David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD Performance Team, Mozilla _______________________________________________ governance mailing list governance@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
