If both are equally popular, it would make sense that this be an easily configurable option in the browser's settings. Favouring one option over the other will inevitably alienate about half the consumers of this awesome feature, which seems like a bit of a waste to me.
It seems like the Firefox team intends to only have what maximises the privacy security protections, and that this extra functionality (hereafter referred to as SameCon, versus the current DefCon) is ideally implemented as an add-on. I'd imagine they're thinking that if a user wants SameCont, that user can just add it as an add-on
I don't think this is the ideal solution, because I'd imagine there are a population of users who just wouldn't consider the possibility that SameCon could Be an add-on. Especially if the community is split roughly down the middle.
I think yours is the ideal solution, making SameCon a configurable option, but having the default option be DefCon. That way, the privacy and security protections are the Default behavior, but a user has the option to change it Built In
"Opening a new tab from a container window opens a normal tab and not a
container tab"
I should note that the last comment on that issue was made in July, so I went ahead and commented asking about adding a setting to change the new-tab container inheritance behavior.
They're probably making a conservative change that's easy to back out of, as a default, and then let various extensions experiment and discover how it should really work.
Personally I would want tabs to be in the bozo container by default, unless I explicitly grant the website access to a trusted container, or something.
Extension makers will experiment and Firefox can choose from what gets learned.
Popularity is only one aspect. The only thing split popularity means is that you probably don't want to make the choice with that as your top criterion. Also, people preferring A doesn't automatically mean you'll alienate them by choosing B. Choosing this default because it's more secure, in the face of a split vote, seems like a pretty decent option to me (and I say this as somebody who would've voted for the other option).
