site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev@lists.apple.com On Jul 27, 2006, at 3:25 AM, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: - Dave _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.appl... This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com Please, can we end this thread before people start bringing up black helicopters and the Knights Templar too? OpenDarwin has decided to shut down. It was a sovereign project and not under Apple's control, so all these conspiracy theories linking it to Apple's own open source plans are baseless and don't add any value to the darwin-dev mailing list. Apple's own open source page, http://developer.apple.com/opensource/, is right where it's always been and continues to provide various open source resources to the community. When and if we make any changes to our open source offerings or services, you'll hear about it through the appropriate apple.com channels, not opendarwin or slashdot! So what's the status of xnu on x86? How is it appropriate for pieces of Darwin to disappear without any guidance on what's happening for months at a time? I realize that WWDC is coming up, but why hasn't there been any statement on what's happening with xnu on x86? Note that I'm not making any value judgment on the usefulness of xnu on x86 to a broad population, but this seems to indicate that Darwin components can and will disappear at will without any announcement, communication, or warning from Apple. Even if xnu source for x86 reappears at WWDC and/or with Leopard, we still had a half a year of limbo - how can enterprises, organizations, or individuals depending on Darwin components continue to depend upon them in good faith? And yes, I'm well aware of the fact that many folks feel they aren't getting as much information as they'd like, or in as timely a fashion as they'd like, through those same apple.com channels but try and be patient all the same. We're all working as hard as we can within certain constraints here. Can you explain to us a little why Apple feels it can't even comment on things that are seemingly as simple as what is going on with sources for certain projects within Apple's ostensibly established open source policy? smime.p7s