I hate this outcome as much as the next guy and I'm sure Apple could have continued to support PWAs if they wanted to. And they should have done it.
That being said, I'm tired of the argument that OSS maintainers are being owed anything (beyond gratitude). They publish their software under licences they themselves choose. As long as someone follows the license, they are good.
If you don't want your work to be used for commercial activities in exchange for nothing, then don't publish it under a license permitting that.
I don't mean to imply that the OSS maintainers are owed anything, because I don't believe that. There is still a social contract without anyone being owed anything. You haven't really given an example of why you don't think it exists.
Also, to what do I owe the honor of you creating a username based on mine, specifically to reply to me?
The maintainers say in the LICENSE files that their creations can be used by anyone for commercial activities with no strings attached. Once they say that, no one who wants to use the creation has any responsibility to uphold any social contract. But I'm just repeating myself.
> Also, to what do I owe the honor of you creating a username based on mine, specifically to reply to me?
A social contract is not defined by a LICENSE file.
Developers are under no obligation to create new software for a hostile company's products. Let's see how many vision pro apps get created if Apple keeps shitting on open standards.
I hate this outcome as much as the next guy and I'm sure Apple could have continued to support PWAs if they wanted to. And they should have done it.
That being said, I'm tired of the argument that OSS maintainers are being owed anything (beyond gratitude). They publish their software under licences they themselves choose. As long as someone follows the license, they are good.
If you don't want your work to be used for commercial activities in exchange for nothing, then don't publish it under a license permitting that.