News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Doctrine switches from LGPL to MIT by vladd on Saturday May 26, 2012 @12:51PM (#4027687)
> Maybe with enough experience you start to realize that it happens close to never that a proprietary fork of an open source project ends up outpacing the original project.

Apple's MacOS uses BSD code. Safari uses WebKit. In terms of audience outreach, I think both have obviously outpaced the original.

Re:Doctrine switches from LGPL to MIT by pygy_ on Saturday May 26, 2012 @01:39PM (#4027825)
WebKit is licensed under the LGPL. Apple can't close its source.
Re:Doctrine switches from LGPL to MIT by binarycrusader on Saturday May 26, 2012 @01:00PM (#4027718)
Except that Apple contributes back to both, so while Apple may have "outpaced" the originals, the originals also benefitted from that.
Re:Doctrine switches from LGPL to MIT by radarsat1 on Saturday May 26, 2012 @01:06PM (#4027735)
My understanding was that Apple's big code dump back to WebKit/KHTML was not useful for the KDE project. Apple is following the OSS spirit in a technical sense but is not succeeding in actually working with community contributions in a meaningful way. Feel free to refute me, I have no evidence, but this was my understanding.
Re:Doctrine switches from LGPL to MIT by pygy_ on Saturday May 26, 2012 @01:41PM (#4027833)
That was the case for the first two releases. After that the KHTML guys complained vocally (it made Slashdot) and Apple started to release diffs, then completely opened the dev process.
Re:Doctrine switches from LGPL to MIT by gcr on Saturday May 26, 2012 @05:13PM (#4028380)
Pardon my ignorence, but what does "completely opened the dev process" mean?
Re:Doctrine switches from LGPL to MIT by TheCoreh on Sunday May 27, 2012 @12:39AM (#4029261)
Re:Doctrine switches from LGPL to MIT by radarsat1 on Saturday May 26, 2012 @08:04PM (#4028776)
Ah good to hear, I never did read about any follow-up after that affair.