Performance Comparison of Mozilla 1.3 Beta and Safari v60

Friday February 14th, 2003

Mac bystander writes: "Interesting article comparing Mach-O Mozilla 1.3b on OS X to the new Safari beta. Sounds like the whole perf thing is not as clear-cut in that comparison as it is when comparing Safari to Chimera (off the 1.0 branch) or Netscape 7 (1.0 branch) on a broadband in-lab connection... ;)"

#37 Re: Re: What KHTML-code is from Mozilla ?

by bzbarsky

Sunday February 16th, 2003 10:44 AM

You are replying to this message

> I searchhed all the sources of KHTML of KDE 3.0.5

Apple's changes have not been merged into the main tree yet. Wait till they have been.

> I thought, OpenSource is also about code reuse...

Open Source is about many things. Code reuse is certainly one of them.

> might be just a matter of asking the corresponding developpers for permission

Indeed. Would they give permission to relicense their code? I'm pretty sure that any changes Apple makes they won't relicense to be usable in Mozilla. Why would they?

> I don't really believe, that anybody took complete functions from one system to the other

Well.... if you're rewriting an entire subsystem, that's actually very doable. But yes, I'm sure some changes were made to the code to make it work in KHTML.

> And copying ideas of how things should get done, cannot be prevented by licenses.

As I said, the Apple engineer in question (hyatt) felt that he left the code intact enough that its use constituted a licensing of the original Mozilla code, not creation of original code.

I'm not saying that KHTML _has_ benefited from mozilla code much up to now. I'm saying they _will_ benefit significantly if they accept the changes Apple makes.

They could always reject those changes, of course (though I fail to see why they would, and if I were them I'd take the changes).