On 15/05/2008, Gregory Seidman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Looks like Apple did terrible harm by devoting resources to improving the > functionality and releasing them to the world, eh? Oh, but it isn't getting > back to KHTML quickly, you say? That sometimes happens in a code fork.
Well, the rules (LGPL) say that they have to give back the code. Which they did, in large chunks, a year later, in ways that were impossible to put back into KDE. They didn't break any written rules, just didn't act in a way that is traditional in the free software community. They acted like a corporation would (this is not a compliment, despite what the "profitable == moral" people think). Forking is generally seen as a hostile falling apart within our community. Forking happens with big disagreements, negative publicity, and internal flamewars. Xemacs vs Emacs, XFree86 vs Xorg, Funpidgin vs Pidgin... And I don't see Apple's forking as a friendly move either. And it's taken a long time for KDE to benefit from it, and in the meantime the whole thing caused flamewars within KDE. Fiasco, I insist. - Jordi G. H. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]