|
|
|
|
|
by Apreche
618 days ago
|
|
Does that mean they merge the actual code from upstream? If they do that, I wouldn't call that a fork. I'd call it a mirror. I'm not exactly sure how that provides any of the benefits the author suggests. Do they look at the changelog of upstream and have engineers re-implement the same things only with original code? That seems like a significant waste of resources just to try to duplicate someone else's efforts. |
|
> Do they look at the changelog of upstream and have engineers re-implement the same things only with original code
No, but they may selectively ignore features or changes that might have caused the fork in the first place.