[clug] Vaguely off topic: iPeds and other Android tablets - availability and comparisons to that Apple one

[Ivan Lazar Miljenovic]

Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> writes:

> On 8/5/10 7:27 PM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
>>
>> They're certainly are allowed to use those projects; I'm just saying
>> it's slightly hypocritical to use those projects and then 1) not
>> actually give any of their own stuff back (as in stuff that was
>> completely developed in-house, not forked off of a pre-existing project)
>> and 2) prevent (or at least put numerous hoops to be jumped by) people
>> from being able to write similar code and use that however they want.
>
> Its the hypocritical bit which confuses me. They made a business
> decision to minimize the amount of engineering they had to do. Which
> they were allowed to do under the terms of the license. This happens
> all the time. Using someone's library doesn't mean you have to sign
> onto their religion.
>
> I guess the point I am trying to make is that complaints like this
> make little sense, and make people less likely to build things on top
> of open source code.
>
> The open source projects that Apple has used have benefited form
> patches back. I see no reason that they should have to release
> unrelated code as some sort of implied social contract.

My take is that the point of FLOSS is a set of mutual
obligations/assistance.  I write code that might help you, you write
code that might help me.

I thus find it rather irritating when someone takes advantage of this
situation to avoid having to write code, but then doesn't extend the
same courtesy back (let alone makes money off of other people's
freely-provided labour without even an attaboy).  It's one thing if said
company is non-technical in nature and doesn't produce any software that
_can_ be opened up; but when a company does produce code...

I liken this to a millionaire going down to a soup-kitchen to eat
because he can't be bothered either making dinner himself or paying
someone else to do so.

>>> Also, apple has contributed plenty of webkit code back, so I think you
>>> need to remove khtml from your list there.
>>
>> Webkit would never have existed AFAICT if Apple had played nicely with
>> upstream in the first place.  FLOSS lets you fork; doesn't mean you
>> should just gratuitously fork because you can't be bothered to play
>> nicely with others.
>
> Sometimes its impossible to play nicely with people who wont
> listen. Just sayin' [1].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebKit#Split_development

Summary: Apple tried sending large patches with minimal documentation
upstream; upstream asked them submit smaller, more manageable patches
(to make it more obvious where something came from, etc.).  Apple
couldn't be bothered so they forked it instead.

-- 
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
Ivan.Miljenovic at gmail.com
IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com