I find it odd to claim that IronFox should be avoided, just because, in your personal opinion: its changes are “too much”.
IronFox’s changes are carefully considered to meaningfully improve privacy, security, freedom, and the overall browsing experience for users (But, honestly, even if this wasn’t the case, I would still never recommend against a project for something this strange/highly subjective).
For reference, unlike your Brace:
- IronFox does not disable support for Firefox Sync for no reason.
- Sync is E2EE, can be self-hosted by users - no privacy risk whatsoever.
- You enforce this via policies, so users have no way to override if desired.
- IronFox does not prevent installing all extensions besides 2 you chose to arbitrarily allow.
- Also enforced by policies, so users have no way to override if desired.
- IronFox does not disable random settings just because they have the word
MLin them. - IronFox does not set random preferences that have been removed from Firefox for several years (Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F).
And yet, to be clear, in spite of these questionable changes, I still think Brace is a good project that is worth looking at for people with Fedora/Linux systems.
So, I’m interested to hear more about what changes IronFox makes that you consider to be “too much”, why you think our changes are “too much”, why the examples I provided from your Brace aren’t too much, and why users should avoid IronFox just for the crime of making them (On a more serious note: I do genuinely mean this - if you have anything of actual substance here, I’d like to hear it).
As for your other response:
My response to the inaccurate claims raised in this thread can be found here: