Re: request to ban 'no source' contributions
>
> posted by: Brian Broker <bkb at cnw.com>
>
> I wrote:
> >
> > Of course, I could write code in VB and submit an EXE and it would
probably
> > be accepted to the archives... <shrug>
> >
>
> 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. If I submitted
> a program that was described as a replacment for ascii.ex but was a
> 'no source' EXE that actually deleted your HD or was a trojan or virus
> or what-have-you... I mean, does RDS actually review every submission?
>
> 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.
>
> Does anybody else see my point here or is it just me? Of course, I'm not
> going to run anything I can't edit (or trust) so I guess I don't have to
> worry but since we are on the topic of 'newbies' and such...
>
> -- Brian
> (just trying to look out for those less-inclined to protect themselves)
>
> PS: This is not intended to be a personal attack on Joe or his VE. This
> is only a suggestion that I hope will be backed by the community.
>
For what it's worth, I agree that there should be no "no source"
"contributions", because, just as the many people on this forum can answer
each others questions, so can the many people here check SOURCE code for
intentional or unintentional bad things, rather than ASSUMING that Rob will
go over every contribution with a fine tooth comb; in addition, hardly
anyone can LEARN from "no source", but many can learn from a contribution
that is in SOURCE.
And I haven't yet seen (may have missed it) WHY such a useful program has to
be non-source.
$.02
Dan Moyer
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
