Safari vs. KHTML

This seems to be another case of the media playing something up way beyond what it is. They sure do like a fight, don't they? Some KDE/KHTML developers recently made comments about how they were unhappy with the way the Apple/KHTML relationship had worked out. Next thing you know, you have articles with titles like “Open-source divorce for Apple's Safari?”. From my POV, the KDE guys made it clear that Apple is following the licensing requirements. The ability to fork is something inherent in Open Source, so being angry that Apple is taking WebCore in a different direction then KHTML seems a bit odd to me. To be fair though, I've really not looked into the details of this enough to form a valid opinion on who is right or wrong here – if anyone even is right/wrong). Sure, it'd have been ideal if both teams had the exact same vision and code fluidly moved back and forth. This is not an ideal world though. Ben Goodger, the lead Firefox engineer, also had something to say about the matter. One comment in his post struck me as odd though. It seems to me that rushing features to hit a deadline really isn't them Open Source way. Release it when it's ready. Of course, there is a line you have to walk – you don't want to have no releases at all while you tweak things beyond belief (which is what I think he was trying to say), but cutting corners to hit a release date will in the end come back to bite you.
–jeremy