According to John Griffin: >Hmmm! Well it isn't every day of the week that I am publicly labelled a >"thief." I admit it smarts a bit, but then Shawn doesn't know me, so I take >it with a mountain of salt. > >He has his convictions which I respect. I have mine in which I hold Apple to >its corporate word that it would make Safari Open source. > >I have expressed my views on this in previous posts and am not going to take >up bandwidth repeating myself. > >jg That's probably the best way to proceed. OpenSouce is not about insiders releasing builds before the folks who have 'signed' the OpenSource 'contracts' are ready to release, any more than it gives me the right to, say, hack into some Gecko developer's box and steal tomorrow's 'build' [of Netscape, Camino, Mozilla, etc] on the grounds that it was an OpenSource project and destined for release, anyway. If I'm Apple Computer, and we have software that is not 'ready', in our estimation, for general release, one reason I might be concerned is that early release will result in lots of problems for the users of the early release, which leads to 'complaints', 'bug' whining in forums, and bad press. None of which promote our good business name, or help to engender positive brand recognition amongst the 'undecideds' and potential 'switchers' out there. I worked for Warner Bros., for a while, and a large retail record chain in Cali, afterwards,long ago. It amazed me, while at the record chain, that so many people made moral distinctions between stealing from a big company, and stealing from a mom-and-pop outfit. There is, in fact, no distinction. The argument that "they were going to release it anyway", is similar to an employee justifying the theft of some Top 40 CD on the grounds of "But we have a promotion in the store where if someone buys 4 they get one free, so it was a 'freebie' anyway". Everyone is entitled to their own [relativist] personal ethics. They're also guaranteed the right to "Tell it to the Judge." ~flipper