I was grepping chromium's code looking for anything like Firefox 's webcompat plugin a few days ago. Lmk if you need any support finding evidence in source code.
I believe including specific site fixes in the main browser release is a bad idea. It seems like many disagree with that belief, and that's fine.
For that example I take issue with the justification in the comment above the code that the problem solved is a high volume of reported issues. That injection solves a problem for webcompat, not Firefox.
What I mean by market share is for each individual site that Firefox pretends to be another browser on, that site's statistics will show very few or no Firefox users. Sites that are already broken probably don't care, but they may see that as justification to disregard Firefox users i
During future changes.
Agreed, and definitely not advocating using another browser I think FF is the best option. I may try removing the webcompat addon and see what happens.
You're right, for a browser meant for the masses it is probably a net benefit. I posted because I was surprised by this hidden behavior that seems better suited for a browser extension. Sneaky behavior like this is what I'm paranoid about in closed software like windows.
To your point, Linux itself is probably the #1 example of hacky patches to work around other people's problems.
So shouldn't you mount your home partition on /var/home instead?