Re: OpenDarwin shutting down

On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 12:11:04PM +0100, Christian Brunschen wrote:
> 
> Even if Apple were to announce (and I'm just making wild suggestions  
> here, not saying that this is possible or plausible) that they have  
> been working internally on an improved, unified Darwin codebase for  
> Leopard, and are now releasing it as Open Source, buildable for ppc  
> and x86 architectures form a single codebase? And that as part of a  
> concerted push, they are going to be actively working with open- 
> source developers to get drivers for various hardware working, and to  
> help people build replacement Mac OS X kernels from the Darwin codebase?

Even then.

> >Given that this is the first WWDC that does
> >not have an Open Source Feedback Forum since 2000, that can be taken
> >as an indication of Apple's desire for communication on the subject.
> 
> On the other hand, WWDC this year has _50_ sessions 'to be  
> announced', which is more than last year's 30, for instance; and _if_  
> there were to be a big shift in strategy regarding Open Source, that  
> might be precisely one of the things to keep hidden until the last  
> possible moment.

Don't you think secret open source announcements are the problem?
Aren't the two fundamentally at odds?  A secret open source announcement
would simply confirm that open source is a marketing tactic, not
an attempt to engage and involve the community.

> I don't see how the entire OpenDarwin project can be considered a  
> failure - parts of it have indeed failed to materialise, but in the  
> mean time OpenDarwin has become host to a number of related and quite  
> successful projects (DarwinPorts, Darwine, WebKit, etc). It seems to  
> me that closing down opendarwin.org entirely is a bit of let-down  
> towards those projects. 

Yes, OpenDarwin hosts roughly 2 dozen projects, of which roughly a half
dozen are remotely active.  However, the most active projects are
either in the process of looking elsewhere, or have been threatening to
move elsewhere for quite some time.

> Also, to quote from the 'About OpenDarwin' page,
> <quote src="http://opendarwin.org/en/about.html">
> 	Goals
> 	The goal of the OpenDarwin project is to provide resources for open 
> source developers to interact and produce products for Apple's Mac OS  
> X. [ ... ]
> </quote>
> OpenDarwin has certainly succeeded in that goal, even if the goal of  
> letting developers rip out and replace the Mac OS X kernel with one  
> they built themselves has not been achieved.

Yes, this is something that has been repeatedly pointed out and lorded
over me since the announcement.  That was not what the original goal said.
The stated goals changed over time as a result of ridicule and derision
by the community at our utter failure to accomplish the original goals.
The stated goals were updated to reflect reality.  It turns out that 
some people can't accept reality.

> I also wonder whether OpenDarwin actually has to be closed down, or  
> whether there might be someone else who would be willing (and able)  
> to continue (what is left of) the OpenDarwin project. Yes, you are  
> done, but it might be possible for OpenDarwin to continue as a host  
> for projects, mirrors of Darwin source code, and so on, even if its  
> original vision and goal are abandoned.
> 
> If someone were to step up and offer to take over the reins, so to  
> speak, would the OpenDarwin core team be willing to let them?

The time has passed for that.  The decision has been made, opendarwin
is closing.  This is non-negotiable.
If you wish you can sit back in the arm chair and talk of what might
have been, question the motives of those involved, etc.
To the right person or organization, OpenDarwin might have been
saved.  We did put out a call for help in March.

I appreciate your concern for OpenDarwin and Apple's Open Source efforts.
I hope you continue to show this same level of support for other
efforts that are not closing.

Rob