2008/8/14 Jack Wootton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I think perhaps this depends on how you choose to categorise what has > (not) happened to the s60 webkit port. I choose to view it at a > company granularity, here's why: It is the same company, the same > legal entity, the same policies, same guidelines, same work ethics > etc.
If you actually believe that, you probably don't know the big corporate world too well. > While you no doubt feel it counter productive to tackle the s60 > webkit issues now, and it may be so in the short time, I have little > doubt that it will be just as counter productive long term, if they > are ignored. > > For a quick gain from Nokia, you are advocating Nokia's behaviour > toward the open source community who wish to use s60 webkit. You are > communicating that it is OK for Nokia to leave a mainline broken for a > year, to provide little documentation, almost zero community support > and absolutely no communication regarding future development. It's not really uncommon that the original author of an open source project leaves it. I know I've done it. Nobody has approached me by claimimg that I was somehow obligated to continue maintenance, let alone prohibiting me from contributing to another project because of it! I'm not saying Nokia has handled the S60 port well (I've heard otherwise), but certainly they are within their rights in not maintaing open sourced code[1]. Blackmailing them with empty threats about unrelated contributions is hardly going to buy you better support in any case... [1] That's why the license says: 'THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED [...] "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES [...]' -- Kalle Vahlman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Powered by http://movial.fi Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
