OpenEuphoria

Re: request to ban 'no source' contributions

• Posted by spent memory <spent.memory at gmail.com> Sep 24, 2004
• 453 views

you make a good point Mr.Trick , i was originally planning on
releasing open source
for Visual Euphoria as soon as i have finished all my personal
vandettas against the code in my application. Meaning i want it to be
at a certain point before i open
it's guts up to the euphoira community, this will probably be in the
next release in a week from now.


On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:31:53 +1000, Patrick Barnes <mrtrick at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 21:11:20 -0700, david <guest at rapideuphoria.com> wrote:
> > posted by: david <studmeow at hotmail.com>
> > In a way, I can understand why a programmer wouldn't want to release
> > source code... I heard one sneer that people who did that didn't want
> > anyone to see their crappy code. But I think there's another reason
> > why this happens:
> > A Euphoria programmer gets enough experience & knowledge to write a
> > decent utility (let's say up on Judith's or even Rob's level) & uploads
> > it to the archive. Now a newbie come along with just enough know-how to
> > do some editing, maybe write a demo, & thinks maybe he can jump ahead &
> > increase his knowledge by editing a program. Maybe he feels he's learned
> > enough with the DOS apps, & wants to try a Windows utility. So he gets
> > something from the archive, hacks into it, & uploads it again. The
> > original author sees the new version & checks it out:
> >                 "HE/SHE DID WHAT!?!?!?
> 
> I think that was mentioned before...
> 
> Thing with that is though...
> 1. How long have the archives been around for? How many times has that
> happened?
> 2. Rob has full control over the submissions archive. If this should
> happen, it could be quickly removed.
> 3. The submissions archive is the central sharing point of Euphoria
> programs. (see 2.)
> 4. Anyone to do this, newbie or not, would be villified by the
> Euphoria community.
> 
> I think Visual Euphoria could be a very valuable tool...
> Noone disputes ownership of your codebase. In fact, if you look at the
> largest projects in Euphoria at the moment, they are usually referred
> to as "Judith's IDE", "Derek Parnell's win32lib", "Pete's M Editor",
> etc... even though many people have contributed to those projects. As
> long as the source is open, and you incorporate peoples bug-fixes into
> the release semi-regularly, there will be no question of ownership,
> and the project will be far better than if it was closed source...
> 
> Many eyes make all bugs easy to find.
> --
> MrTrick
> 
> 
> 
> 
>