On Nov 26, 2007, at 7:59 AM, Robert William Fuller wrote:
I hate to suggest it, but why not give up on Darwin? Apple as a whole
does not seem to be committed to open source. I suspect Darwin was
more
motivated by marketing than by a sincere commitment.
What makes you say that? Darwin is still available in source form and
aside from one or two packages everything that has been available in
source form has stayed available. Apple provides it as a way for
developers to peer into the underlying guts of OS X. In that respect
I feel they've captured the true spirit of open source which is to be
transparent about the inner workings of their software.
That said, they used to also provide binary releases which is
obviously a ton of work. Apple no longer seems to think that the
benefits of having an available binary release outweigh the costs of
making one. I'll buy that argument so if that's the case then why
don't they license a handful of binary drivers they already have and
let someone else do a binary release of Darwin. That gives them all
the benefits of a binary Darwin release at little to no cost to them.
Apple's under no obligation to license updated versions of their
binary kexts but it would sure be nice if they did.
-Dave
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-x86 mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-x86/email@hidden
