Okay? That still doesn’t mitigate the need for this specific PR first though to even get to that discussion point. That line you mention is not part of the contents of this PR.

A good partner discusses startegy and shared interest first, negotiates terms of engagement, tradeoffs, shared roadmaps, etc.

Instead we get a pretty arrogant and presumptive interaction from the Apple crew.

It should be noted that Apple is struggling with visionOS and Pro adoption amongst consumers and developers, so their arrogance is unwarranted and they cannot rely on market power.

That’s what this PR is! It’s a first attempt to start that dialogue. You can even see the employee trying to address notes as they come in, and asking if there are better ways they should align with Godot.

Point to the arrogance involved. From all your comments I can see you have an intense distaste for Apple and I honestly feel it’s colouring your perception of this change.

The only person who seems upset is you. The Godot maintainers are positive, Miguel is positive.

Should contributors never open PRs until they’ve discussed it first? What if they want to get feedback on an idea in code form?

How is it arrogant? What should they do instead?

It feels like we're reading different discussions. All I see is Apple engineers addressing every raised concern.

Getting angry at companies for contributing to OSS is not the hill to die on. If it is -- I can't even imagine your feelings towards Intel, AMD, Qualcomm, Google, etc. for their contributions to Linux.

> Instead we get a pretty arrogant and presumptive interaction from the Apple crew.

You're being completely ridiculous here. It's a well-written, considered, appropriate for the project PR.

No one is being forced at gun point to accept it.