It shows the overall diff since last update, not patch-wise. But it does show any extra patch file, install script, etc. – not just the PKGBUILD – if that's what you meant.
And high temperatures, too. Meaning they don't require cooling nor heating, basically matching the per kg capacity of ready modules with LFP while being significantly safer and less complex.
The codebase will diverge quickly; the Russian one is heavily obfuscated with s ton of Russian in it and obscure commit messages. A large portion of prep work by Nextcloud was cleaning and translating. OnlyOffice was also known for refusing PRs, too.
When checking in, Ryanair UI makes you click "I don't want a seat" instead of "I don't want TO CHOOSE a seat" when you want to opt out from paying for one.
> For every niche thing you wish that Apple or other third parties do only for your own enjoyment, there are hundreds of millions of other people who want different niche things.
We're talking Apple publishing specs for their hardware. That's not some "niche, particular, random" feature each persons asks for. We're all asking the same thing. Same thing that IBM did and what made the PC and IT industry as we know it.
> You've been misguided into following a false religion.
You're being misguided by your patronizing attitude.
I don't believe it. Ask a random number of people or a random number of Apple customers, and less than a fraction of a percent will say that the option to install Linux on their MacBook is what they most want from Apple.
More people will probably ask for a handle, or LED flashlight, or how about built-in invoicing software? Should the EU (praised be their names) force Apple to give these customers what they want? Why would their wants be any less important than yours?
No one said otherwise. Apple tightly coupling macOS is not mutually exclusive with Apple publishing specs for allowing to support other OS on that hardware.
> I don't believe that Apple has ever acknowledged the project at all, let alone promote it. Apple is neutral towards their work as far as I can tell.
How do you draw that conclusion based on their public indifference? If they acknowledged it and promoted, you could assume they are pro Asahi. But them not acknowledging it doesn't imply they aren't anti Asahi.
If they actually wanted that project to succeed and bring more diversity to Mac dev ecosystem, they'd help the project outright. Meanwhile they continue to exploit Linux for their dev purposes while still locking you into the macOS. This is their clear strategy, i.e. to make you continue to use macOS even when you prefer Linux as dev platform, just based on what they showed during WWDC. They aren't neutral.
reply