|
Marc Clifton wrote:
It really depends
First, I really agree with that statement. But then again there is a little contradiction between the survey's headline and its details. While the Headline What type of source code license do you prefer? is quite ambiguous (this is where I also would say it depends on the situation) my vote was more an answer to the second questions: What license would you use for code you wish to share with the community? For me true sharing with the community means not wanting to make money out of it. So I don't care if some hobby programmer uses the code or some big company. Consequently I voted for Unrestricted use and redistribution whereas I basically meant the BSD License[^].
Best regards
Dennis
|
|
|
|
|
For my consultancy work I have a set of libraries that I use across projects. These are all BSD licenced. I do this so that I can retain copyright but my clients are also free to have other developers work on the projects in the future.
Although I am evaluating using GPL for full projects that I'm considering open-sourcing. For the general purpose libraries though, I'll stick with BSD because I don't like restricting developers who may find the libraries useful.
Michael
CP Blog [^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have tried to use many open-source components. But the larger projects are simply to complex to use without proper documentation.
And thats whats missing all the time. I tried for example the axiom 3d engine. No docs provided. Asked for it, no reply.
I dumped the project and started writing my own engine. Its sad to throw good stuff away because of bad documentation.
"Every rule in a world of bits and bytes can be bend or eventually be broken"
|
|
|
|
|
Some are intensional  You may have to pay some "consultancy fee". 
Best regards,
Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Selormey wrote:
You may have to pay some "consultancy fee".
Nail on the head.
IMO the biggest problem with "free software, paid services" is that this approach promotes sloppy software, or at least sloppy software interfaces. Not even malicous/intentional, but when making something "user friendly" means farewell to the hand that feeds you, it is not done.
we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, and that is a bad thing about that kind of open-source.
I would be better of with a little help on the forums here and some articles, that way I can make the programs myself.
|
|
|
|
|
Who voted that down? And why?
Paul Selormey wrote:
You may have to pay some "consultancy fee".
I agree that I think that is what is happening in some OSS.
Although, sometimes I think that it is because the developers think that it unimportant detail and think that their product is so great that everyone will instantly understand it. For instance, DotNetNuke. It is a great piece of software but the documentation sucks. Kudos to Bo Nørgaard of Bonosoft for writing a really useful and easy to understand introduction to setting up DNN in Visual Studio and a really nice simple tutorial about how to create your first module. See: http:\\www.DotNetNuke.dk[^]
Do you want to know more?
WDevs.com - The worlds first Developers Services Provider
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
Who voted that down? And why?
Probably the same guy who always gives Paul's posts 1. I think somebody has taken a dislike to the sig.
Michael
CP Blog [^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
I'm guessing that it is someone with a platinum rating, because I expected my vote to bring the overall vote to 3 (if they were gold) or higher.
Hmm. I hope it wasn't a platinum user. There are so few and I like to think they don't just vote without commenting.
Michael
CP Blog [^]
|
|
|
|
|
Michael P Butler wrote:
I think somebody has taken a dislike to the sig.
Hope that is the case. It means he/she is always reading my sig.
Best regards,
Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
|
|
|
|
|
I have seen a lot of bad / nonexistant documentation with closed source as well.
John
|
|
|
|
|
The silliness of the Gnu crowd never ceases to amaze me.
|
|
|
|
|
this is not silliness , it is simply the mimicry on the word "copyright" , it makes much sense if you ponder on this, and the mission of GNU.
|
|
|
|
|
It's mimicry, but silly. "Copyright" describes "the right to copy". "Copyleft" means nothing, except "we're not right; we're left".
Silly. Just like the pointless Gnu name.
|
|
|
|
|
just think, if this world didn't have "silly" things like this, then how dull it would be!
--
Raoul Snyman
Saturn Laboratories
e-mail: raoul.snyman@saturnlaboratories.co.za
web: http://www.saturnlaboratories.co.za/
linux user: #333298
|
|
|
|
|
Someone here wrote "Copyfree" and I think I love this too 
Best regards,
Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
|
|
|
|
|
There are 2 types of people in this world:
1.) Those who find the question, "What is the difference between a duck?", funny.
2.) And those who don't.
What I've found is, the one's who don't find it funny, find it irritating.
<signature>
It's good to live,
Josef Wainz
Software Developer
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
