Re: request to ban 'no source' contributions
THOSE ARE PRODUCTS NOT CONTRIBUTIONS
----- Original Message -----
From: "cklester"
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: request to ban 'no source' contributions
>
> posted by: cklester <cklester at yahoo.com>
>
> Brian Broker wrote:
>
> > Now that I've thought about it more, I'd actually like to suggest that
> > 'no source' submissions not be allowed to the Eu archives. My feeling
> > is that the archives should be a resource for learning.
>
> The archives are simply that: an archive of Euphoria programs,
> source or not. Source is not required to show-off a Euphoria program's
> features.
Then there should be at least a flag for "source" just like Linux, Generic,
DOS, Win32.
> I do understand your concern about running closed-source programs.
However,
> I trust that Rob would not post something to the archive that will be
> damaging to my PC. That's why I don't mind closed-source programs...
> they're coming from a site I can trust.
Unless Rob himself gets the source and then inspects it. This can't be
guaranteed
and even at that. Finding a malicious intent can be very difficult and
tricky if the
person is truley intent. Burying code within a great app isn't beyond one
that
wants to destroy. Even if it is extremely unlikely.
I don't tend to fear this simply because the number of bad people in the
world
is greatly out numbered by good people. I feel the chances are just to
small
and I also tend not to use closed source items. So my position is doubly
safe.
> > If you want to secure your source then it should be held on your own
site
> > with your own terms. Maybe a place like download.com or tucows.com
would
> > suit your needs if you don't like to share.
I agree
> I think download.com charges for hosting (right William?). I don't know
> about the others.
Oh, so there aren't any free release areas out there? I seriously doubt
that
besides. download.com, tucows and friends have a much larger audience
than our growing Euphoria community. Free webspace is readily available.
Though it is usually attached to things like. pop ups, pop unders, banners
and many other evil advertising schemes. But they still remain, and are
quite
usable. There aren't any free tickets or lunches in this world.
> Software authors are not required to share their source. I've got several
> contributions in the archive, all open source, but there are projects on
> the board that I will submit that I will not reveal the source.
Fine. I still don't like the idea of the source not being released and you
have
your own site and webspace. I'm not saying not to tell the community.
The EuForum still stands. I still feel that Euphorian advertising should be
allowed in here. It is rare to occur and largely ignored but.. I see no
harm
in it. Besides we all have to put food on the table somehow.
Personally if I want it to be closed source I simply won't release it.
or I put it on my own space and find ways to promote it. Those are products
not contributions
Hmm, that sounded so good and to the point I think I will say it again.
THOSE ARE PRODUCTS NOT CONTRIBUTIONS
> (I also have projects I won't (or can't) submit to the archive that won't
> be open source... code written under contract for commercial reasons. :) )
I fully understand this. It happens all the time and we rarely hear
anything
of it. Big whoop. just because you write some things that are open
doesn't mean that everything you write has to be open. Still gotta put food
on the table. Euphoria isn't open but its includes are. (gets.e)
> -=ck
> "Programming in a state of EUPHORIA."
> http://www.cklester.com/euphoria/
See, you have a site. Shut up.. sorry, that last part just came out.
I didn't mean the shut up. Any how. Unkmar over and out
unkmar
THOSE ARE PRODUCTS NOT CONTRIBUTIONS
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
