>It seems Apple is now on the warpath against ALL GPL'd code ...(the presumption is they do not like the viral nature) …
IMHO it's not Apple being nazi. It's forced on them. App Store sells products developed by 3rd parties, under contract governed by the usual commercial agreements to protect IPR, e.g. non-disclosure. It follows that "Open Source" and "App Store product" are a contradiction in terms. But Apple has always based its business on offering (I don't say "guaranteeing") some sort of security with its premium-priced products. But more and more they're being asked to deliver. They can only do this – and only with their newer products, like iOS and Catalina – if they stop your machine *ever* running *any* code that has not been downloaded *without modification* from App Store. How are they going to do this without stifling independent development? This must be really taxing their best minds. Think of a nation state trying to prevent their children (read: "citizens") seeing bad stuff on the worldwide web. I discern 3 approaches: 1. The Iranian approach. Pull the plug and stick the whole country in purdah. 2. The USA/UK approach. Heavy bureaucracy that's mainly for show. All fur coat and no knickers. 3. The Chinese approach. Iron hand in velvet glove. Needs bold PR. Apple, I'd say, is trying to stay with approach 3. But 2 and 1 are creeping in, as panic measures. Ian Clark On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 at 21:04, greg heil <[email protected]> wrote: > >i have not been following this discussion close enough to know... but a > recent uproar in the i'verse may be relevant: It seems Apple is now on the > warpath against ALL GPL'd code ...(the presumption is they do not like the > viral nature) ... so it may be necessary to rethink our open source > approach ... if we want to remain in the i'verse. > > ~greg > http://krsnadas.org > > <snipped> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
