Slashdot Log In
Apple Releases WebKit
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Tue Jun 07, 2005 08:31 AM
from the step-in-the-right-direction dept.
from the step-in-the-right-direction dept.
rohanl writes "Apple has responded to recent criticisms from the KHTML developers by providing a live CVS repository (including all history) of WebCore, JavaScriptCore and the newly open sourced WebKit, public mailing list, irc channel and bug database. Details at the new webkit.opendarwin.org"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Dated icon (Score:5, Funny)
Hey Taco, better change the Apple section's "G5" logo to the Intel logo.
Re:Dated icon (Score:5, Informative)
"Mac OS on Intel is to be given to developers (ADC "Select" and "Premier" members) now and to customers "this time next year." The transition will be completed in less than 2 years, by the end of 2007."
Parent
Re:Dated icon (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dated icon (Score:3, Insightful)
But WAIT!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:But WAIT!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Would Apple have done this had they not complained?
Parent
Re:But WAIT!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
The "relatively small group of people" you're talking about are the ones who created the base core of Safari's rendering engine (KHTML) for fuck's sake. And if you had at least checked what happened, you'd have seen that the K guys had indeed asked (privately, not in public channels) for limited access to Apple's Safari repository and bug tracker before...
Parent
Re:But WAIT!!! (Score:3, Funny)
You're welcome. ; )
Anyway, the point is that more people care about this than just the KHTML people -- Apple's doing it to appease the whole of Slashdot, at least.
Re:But WAIT!!! (Score:5, Funny)
They're going to complain about the code being PPC-centric... no, wait... damn...
Parent
Re:But WAIT!!! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:But WAIT!!! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:But WAIT!!! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:But WAIT!!! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:But WAIT!!! (Score:3, Informative)
E.g., with ObjectiveC++ you don't need to write a pure-C bridge, to get Objective-C and C++ to interoperate.
Now, that said, it's not like you can write a C++ subclass of an Objective-C class, but it's useful. Really useful.
Wait and see first... (Score:2, Interesting)
Personally I hope it is, as it is a good show of how two groups with different agenda's can benefit from Open Source.
Jan
Re:Wait and see first... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, but that's just bs... the "KHTML developers" picked the license, and Apple gave back as much as they had to according to that license.
That's it, that's the whole thing; Apple never were the bad guys, because they did what they have to.
Now Apple is doing even more than they have to, and now you are waiting for the "KHTML developers" to say if they like it or not before figuring out if Apple are they good guys or not???
Wake up and realize that Apple's doing more than they have to, now it's up to the "KHTML developers" to figure out if they 1) want to use to code or 2) can use the code.
If they can't use the code, then what would Apple have to do to make them the good guys in your book??? Hire people to teach them and/or do the programming for them?
Parent
Re:Wait and see first... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry, but that's just bs... the "KHTML developers" picked the license, and Apple gave back as much as they had to according to that license. That's it, that's the whole thing; Apple never were the bad guys, because they did what they have to.
Bullshit. The fact that they weren't legally required to be good citizens does not mean no one should ever be able to criticize their actions. They took a piece of software from an open-source group, acted like they wanted to cooperate with them, then forked it too far and acted like asses when the KHTML guys asked them to try to work back toward one codebase. They went so far as to tell the KHTML guys to just drop their project and use Apple's version.
None of this was illegal. It was just a dickhead move.
Of course, now Apple has done something in the hopes of correcting that, which indicates they also feel they haven't done right by KHTML. Hopefully this will help the situation...overall, I have seen Apple as a halfway decent OSS player. But in this case, I think time will have to tell...the real issue is whether this will help the two codebases codevelop more or not. If it doesn't, Apple will have been the "bad guy" because they will have unnecessarily split development resources and time for a project that could have been cooperatively handled. That's a Bad Thing, regardless of whether it's legally permissible.
Parent
Re:Wait and see first... (Score:3, Insightful)
Forking isn't a bad thing, it happens all the time... The "problem" is that Apple didn't say that they were going to take the code and fork off, and I don't think they ever inte
Re:Wait and see first... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple wants to make some use of OSS code in their software, but they don't want to contribute back, which is not cool.
I think you're way off base. What makes you think they don't want to contribute back? Did you read the article about KDE passing the ACID compliance test? That was due to an Apple engineer patching WebCore so Safari would pass then specifically writing a bunch of comments and micro patches for the KDE guys. For which, I might add, he was thouroughly ridiculed here on Slashdot for not providing a CVS repository (Apple does not use CVS) which one of the KDE guys had asked for a few days previously.
Now Apple is providing a CVS repository at extra work and expense to themselves and you have the gall to say that they don't want to contribute back? Are you actively trying to make the OpenSource movement look like a bunch of pricks or is it unintentional? How about when a commercial company bends over backwards, spends money and time to do exactly what is asked of them even when they have no legal obligation, and basically do everything they can to be the good guy, use and support open code and standards and give back very useful improvements you don't attribute it to them being forced to by all the bad press you've previously generated about them in a forum that they don't care about anyway?
Apple is being nice because the engineers working there are good guys and want to be nice and help out. They aren't doing it to avoid bad press. Give credit where it is due already.
Parent
Re:Wait and see first... (Score:5, Insightful)
They had contributed back
They did release all their changes as one giant tarball, which, while complying with the license, is not a good basis for merging back changes. They did not get actively involved in hacking KHTML, instead they did a classic fork. This is not bashing Apple, just trying to bust some myths.OSS people got upset as they wanted more.
KHTML developers never complained about Apple's way of doing things. They were annoyed about users saying "This is fixed in Safari, why isn't it fixed in KHTML? They are the same thing!", so they pointed out that no, it wasn't, and merging with Apple is no easy task, because (a) the codebases have diverged so much and (b) the format in which Apple publishes its changes is, while legally sufficient, not an good one for merging changes back. Somehow, that was interpreted as complaining about Apple, while all they were really doing was trying to bust the myth that KHTML and Webkit are still the same thing.Parent
Re:Wait and see first... (Score:3, Interesting)
Without wishing to sound too fanboyish... (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, some of the criticisms of the Konqueror team may have had some validity - specifically, there is little room in the cutthroat commercial arena for the unwavering dogmatism, devotion to absolute technical superiority over immediate user needs, etc. Hopefully the two can forge a way forward together now that Apple has made this (much needed) gesture.
iqu
Re:Without wishing to sound too fanboyish... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Without wishing to sound too fanboyish... (Score:3, Interesting)
Fact is that some form of DRM is an essential prerequisite for an information-based economy, regardless of what the 'information wants to be free' types spout over
Good show Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
The deserved it in no small degree when they made it difficult for KHTML developers to reintegrate their changes into the mainline tree.
However, I am glad to see they responded to the community's criticisms in such a constructive manner. This is good for everybody. It's good for KHTML, as Apple's improvements can now be integrated cleanly into the mainline tree, and it is good for Apple, both on the PR/Community Relations front, and on the technical front, as they can continue to benefit from developments in KTHML and their porting burden should, at least theortecially, be lessened as their changes make it back into the main development tree.
Good show, Apple. Few flesh-and-blood people would have the character to admit a mae culpa and change their ways. For corporations, this is even more rare. This doesn't change my skepticism WRT the move to Intel (though if it is a move to AMD64 said skepticism is alleviated, and if the move is a result of supply issues with IBM, said move is understandable despite my skepticism, but I digress), but it is reassuring to see positive movements on other fronts.
Defunct? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Safari for Windows (Score:3, Interesting)
"Safari's tabbed browsing isn't as elegant."
Doing a feature comparison between the two browsers' implementation of tabbed browsing, all I can come up with is as follows:
Favicons
Safari: Not supported
Firefox: Site's favicon is displayed in tab
Verdict: Win for Firefox
Close button
Safari: Each tab has its own close button
Firefox: Single close button to the extreme right of the tabs bar closes the active tab
Verdict: Win for Safari
Is there a single other significant difference?
Re:Safari for Windows (Score:3, Insightful)
Just a reminder (Score:5, Insightful)
- Previously, Apple was following the LETTER of the LGPL license, and giving back all changes
- The KHTML developers were not pleased about the monolithic tarballs, but accepted that it was a valid option
- They were, however, annoyed about all the fanboys who complained that KHTML wasn't merging Apple's changes
- Apple is now following the SPIRIT of LGPL
- Yes, we are in fact through the looking glass, but that was yesterday's article
Any questions?Re:Just a reminder (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm baffled by the people stating in this thread that the GPL "preferred form" clause means that you have to give people access to your versioning system. Have you people read the GPLs? It offers CDs over postal mail as a valid method of satisfying your GPL obligations! It explicitly lists mailing big chunks of code as a valid option for GPL licensees! I mean, actually read these things, people!
Now if emailing big chunks of tarball on demand is violating the spirit of the GPL then why does the GPL suggest you do that?
Parent
"Preferred form" BS (Score:3, Funny)
The "preferred form" of most Apple developers is probably some versioning system running as a client on G5 workstations, so obviously Apple is legally obligated to provide the changed source code to KHTML developers in that form. Go sign on to the KHTML project now and your free G5 will be shipped soon!
Balance (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Balance (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Balance (Score:3, Insightful)
For now.
If anyone thinks, even for a second, after the back-to-back heartbreaks of the PowerPC 7400 and 970 (not to mention the stillborn misfires of the 620, 8500 etc etc etc), that Apple will not -- having already gone through the pain of an x86 migration -- have an alternate supplier to Intel on deck... well, I'd like some of what that person is smoking.
Intel, AMD, Via, Transmeta: the whole gamut is open to Apple now, and they would be dumb in
All of you zombies (Score:5, Insightful)
SPIRIT schmirit.
Their behavior boils down to "Wah, I offered my friend a lollipop and he took it."
Re:All of you zombies (Score:5, Informative)
* don't keep bugging us about when Konqueror will do what Safari does because it's not as simple as taking Apple's patches and applying them
* don't keep saying how great it is that Apple are giving us these features
He explicitly said that it was fine for Apple to behave as they were. He just asked that people didn't keep giving Apple credit for doing things that actually needed to be done independently by the KHTML team.
The mess started when multiple news websites and bloggers misreported this as an anti-Apple flame and subsequently seemed to base their articles on each others, not the original post.
Parent
Re:All of you zombies (Score:5, Informative)
No, that's slashdot's behavior. Most of the KHTML developers really wish slashdot would keep their damn uninformed blathering to themselves, and while they're at it, get a little informed and stop demanding that KHTML support Safari features within 1 day of implementation because "they're the same codebase, right?"
No one but slashbots are griping incessantly about the licensing.
Parent
Not a zero sum game (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not a zero sum game (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple took khtml and extended it the way it felt it needed to for Safari. Meanwhile, the khtml people were changing and extending it there own way, which happened to be a bit of a different direction. This happens all the time, and it isn't anyones fault.
Many times it becomes very hard to backport code after forks, regardless of who forked the code. The only way to fix that is to restrict development by others to a similar path as your development, which shits on the "spirit" of the GPL just as much if not more then what people were complaining about Apple doing in the first place.
When you release code under the GPL you have to know that it is totally possibly somebody might fork it and create patches that are useless to you. That is the nature of the beast and all part of the OSS development environment. If you can't deal with it, then don't use the GPL.
Parent
Posting from CVS WebKit... (Score:3, Interesting)
What?? (Score:5, Funny)
The best they could do at the time (Score:4, Insightful)
From previous discussions: (Score:4, Insightful)
If they weren't happy with Apple following the license to the letter, they were using the wrong license.
Re:Speechless (Score:2)
Apple is not an evil company. Sure, they don't have a "do no evil" policy and they have occasional lapses, but they recognize the fact that good will is valued by customers, and customers' respect produces money.
If you want a company that's inherently evil, you know where to find it.
Evil Company TM contact Details: (Score:5, Funny)
The SCO Group, Inc. (SCO) is a provider of software solutions for small- to medium-sized businesses (SMBs) and replicated branch offices. SCO solutions include UNIX platforms; messaging, authentication, and e-business tools; and services that include technical support, education, consulting, and solution provider support programs.
Based in Lindon, Utah, SCO has a worldwide presence with representation in 82 countries. This infrastructure enables SCO to provide local support and dependable solutions to businesses around the world. In addition, SCO has a channel of more than 11,000 solution providers, a developer network of nearly 8,000, thousands of direct account customers and an installed base of more than two million systems.
SCO solutions are divided into three broad areas: operating systems, extended platform and services.
Contact Us
Please bookmark our home page HERE [sco.com] for quick access to the latest information on all SCO products and services. Click HERE [sco.com] to purchase products. To become a SCO reseller, please click HERE [slashdot.org]. SCO may be reached using one of the following options:
Support Services
For information on support service options, contact your product supplier or SCO directly.
SCO Worldwide Support Services
For information on SCO Support Services, click HERE [slashdot.org] or: United States and Canada 1-800-726-8649 Korea +82-2-784-2542 Japan 03-5290-3900 Latin American Countries Contact your local SCO Sales Office [sco.com] Europe, Middle East, India, Africa and Pacific Rim +44(0)1923-813 600SCO offers a broad portfolio of technical support services tailored to the needs of partners, corporate accounts and end users. With support centers located in North America, Europe and Asia Pacific, staffed by SCO's highly skilled support engineers and local language support availability, SCO can meet all our customer support service requirements.
Parent
Re:Only because.. (Score:4, Insightful)
b) they've just added additional ways of accessing the source instead of a giant tarball
Parent
Re:Only because.. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:A good sign (Score:5, Insightful)
Getting half the patches in sounds like an advantage, especially compared to none, which is what would be the case if Apple had not adopted KHTML, right? So in the end, prior to this advance, KHTML gained lots of work, and Apple gained lots of work, and thus both had already benefited.
Parent
Re:A good sign (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple always did what they were supposed to do under the KHTML license...
What more or less happened:
- Apple was doing what they were supposed to do, but not anything more
- KHTML devs asked for some more, mainly access to Apple/Safari's internal repository and bug tracker in order to have a better understanding of webcore and ease the porting of the patches to the main KHTML trunk
- There were no answers from Apple
- KHTML devs dropped the issue and just decided to forget about it and keep working as they always had
- Acid 2 is released, Dave Hyatt does a wonderful job on Safari and soon gets the first fully Acid2 compliant browser (dev version)
- Everyone is overjoyed... and people start saying how wonderful apple is and how it'll benefit to KHTML core (I've been guilty of it, too)
- Main KHTML dev blogs saying that there is no way for the K devs to easily patch the tree from Webcore patches, that there is no real communication/backfeed between KHTML and Safari teams, and that people who don't have a clue about how it works should shut the fuck up (note that what he was ranting about was people not having a clue, not the relationship between Apple and the K team)
The of GP is fucking nonsense and cluelessness, which is why his post isn't informative in any wayParent
Re:A good sign (Score:5, Informative)
Because there is no "-1 factually incorrect" moderation. The previous poster apparently had no idea what they were talking about. The KDE team made no agreement with Apple, Apple just took the code and used it in compliance with its license. Then they released the changes when they released WebCore, much to the surprise and delight of the KDE team. They have been giving back all the changes, but since the Konqueror project decided a lot of them were not the way the wanted the project to go and since both groups are using different versioning systems the KDE folks were having some difficulty extracting the changes they wanted from all the Webcore code.
After some time of this one of the KDE guys got sick of everyone telling him how easy his job was now that Apple was doing all his work for him and wrote a very reasonable and clear statement about how Apple's changes were really hard to incorporate and why and how they wished Apple would give the team access to a CVS repository. This got posted to Slashdot and horribly misinterpreted by the vast majority of the readers into some sort of "Apple is stealing open source code" thread.
Immediately thereafter one of the Safari guys fixed Safari so it would pass the acid compliance test and made sure to put in special notes just for the KDE guys. Again, Slashdot picked this up and there was a huge rehashing of the previous argument, despite Apple trying hard to be nice. Now Apple has gone to great lengths and released exactly what the KDE team asked for despite the fact that it is extra work and expense (which they might have done earlier had they actually been asked).
The previous poster of course only read a few idiot's comments on Slashdot, never read any of the articles and thus was spreading his ignorance on Slashdot even more by restating factually incorrect third-hand interpretations of opinionated and poorly informed comments from Slashdot. Hence the modding down (or so I guess since I did not mod him).
Parent