5 ms·

Why would Apple do anything? They're getting it for free while contributing nothing. It's what you should expect when developing permissively licensed software.

by mik1998 4y ago

JoachimS 4y ago
Apple do contribute to some open source projects, by employing developers and also being actively involved. IRRC clang + llvm for example. There are global enterprises which (internally) explicitly forbid any empolyees to contribute to open source code used to develop their product (tools, IDEs) and even used in their product (The Linux kernel for example). That said, Apple providing Daniel / the Curl project with a machine should be a no-brainer.
- traceroute66 4y ago
  >That said, Apple providing Daniel / the Curl project with a machine should be a no-brainer. The problem with that is where do you stop ? How many OSS projects are there ? Where do you draw the line on who gets a free machine ? Then we get into the question of whether it's just the project maintainers or any contributor ? And if the contributors, then how many LoC do they need to contribute before they get a free machine ? If Bob just submits a PR to bump a version number, does he get a free machine ? Giving a free machine to any Tom, Dick or Harry who has ever published a piece of OSS code is simply not a serious proposition.
  - rzzzt 4y ago
    Let's stop at Daniel for the first attempt. No Toms, no Harrys.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    If I were Tim Apple and wanted to donate a machine to particular projects; anonymously through an engineer or lawyer is exactly how I’d do it. Having it be known that Apple is a hardass and gives nothing helps keep the noise down.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
    > How many OSS projects are there ? Where do you draw the line on who gets a free machine ? Surely a reasonable minimum is the software that Apple are themselves shipping with macos
  - toast0 4y ago
    Here's a solid proposal. One machine per project. Project defined as a source tarball/repo used when building the OS. So all the stuff that comes from FreeBSD base counts as one project, sorry developer(s) of /usr/bin/cal, you'll have to fight for access with the rest of the FreeBSD team. Exception policies for shenanigans. It's not that hard to share a mac among a developer team, so one mac per project is a good start. There's natural downward pressure on the number of upstream projects used, so one for each of those is a good start. If you also make it request based rather than reaching out to send them, the capex won't be too bad; some upstreams won't be interested anyway.
  - yyyk 4y ago
    It's not very difficult if Apple wants to bother. Several possible criteria: A) OSS which Apple uses internally - e.g. I'd be very surprised if there's no usage of curl out there. (and / or) B) Very popular projects. (and / or) C) Projects where Apple has a strategic interest in being able to run on M1. e.g. certain developer tooling.
  - zimbatm 4y ago
    You could say the same thing to giving to charity. Pick a budget and then stick to it. It's not complicated.

Why would Apple do anything? They're getting it for free while contributing nothing. It's what you should expect when developing permissively licensed software.

JoachimS 4y ago

Apple do contribute to some open source projects, by employing developers and also being actively involved. IRRC clang + llvm for example. There are global enterprises which (internally) explicitly forbid any empolyees to contribute to open source code used to develop their product (tools, IDEs) and even used in their product (The Linux kernel for example). That said, Apple providing Daniel / the Curl project with a machine should be a no-brainer.

traceroute66 4y ago
>That said, Apple providing Daniel / the Curl project with a machine should be a no-brainer. The problem with that is where do you stop ? How many OSS projects are there ? Where do you draw the line on who gets a free machine ? Then we get into the question of whether it's just the project maintainers or any contributor ? And if the contributors, then how many LoC do they need to contribute before they get a free machine ? If Bob just submits a PR to bump a version number, does he get a free machine ? Giving a free machine to any Tom, Dick or Harry who has ever published a piece of OSS code is simply not a serious proposition.
- rzzzt 4y ago
  Let's stop at Daniel for the first attempt. No Toms, no Harrys.
- bombcar 4y ago
  If I were Tim Apple and wanted to donate a machine to particular projects; anonymously through an engineer or lawyer is exactly how I’d do it. Having it be known that Apple is a hardass and gives nothing helps keep the noise down.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
  > How many OSS projects are there ? Where do you draw the line on who gets a free machine ? Surely a reasonable minimum is the software that Apple are themselves shipping with macos
- toast0 4y ago
  Here's a solid proposal. One machine per project. Project defined as a source tarball/repo used when building the OS. So all the stuff that comes from FreeBSD base counts as one project, sorry developer(s) of /usr/bin/cal, you'll have to fight for access with the rest of the FreeBSD team. Exception policies for shenanigans. It's not that hard to share a mac among a developer team, so one mac per project is a good start. There's natural downward pressure on the number of upstream projects used, so one for each of those is a good start. If you also make it request based rather than reaching out to send them, the capex won't be too bad; some upstreams won't be interested anyway.
- yyyk 4y ago
  It's not very difficult if Apple wants to bother. Several possible criteria: A) OSS which Apple uses internally - e.g. I'd be very surprised if there's no usage of curl out there. (and / or) B) Very popular projects. (and / or) C) Projects where Apple has a strategic interest in being able to run on M1. e.g. certain developer tooling.
- zimbatm 4y ago
  You could say the same thing to giving to charity. Pick a budget and then stick to it. It's not complicated.