Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Amiga Kit Amiga Store Iridium Banner AMIStore App Store A1200/A600 4xIDE Interface

AuthorTopic: Timberwolf Progress Update  (Read 14481 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

guest7146

  • Guest
Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #30 on: August 07, 2011, 08:43:53 AM »
Quote from: buzz;653484
not at all. my point is not the license that people choose for their own work, but that Amiga developers love to utilize other peoples open source, and do their best to avoid releasing the changes. in this case, they are using a clause in the mozilla license to not release their "new parts". yes it is their decision to make, but it isn't in the spirit of things, and especially since Amiga developers benefit so much from all the open source available, it seems crap they never manage to give anything back (or to share code with the other amiga platforms). and we are also talking about a commercially dead platform here (in any real sense, im sure many will not agree) where people quite often ditch projects and are never to be seen again, so I do think open source can help in some cases.

I see where you're going with your points, but I don't really agree with them.

Regarding your point about the Amiga being commercially dead, I guess that really depends on what you mean.  If you're saying that it's impossible to make any money on the Amiga platform anymore, then I disagree.  But if you're saying that it's not yet possible to make substantial (substantial as taken to mean a fortune - millions) on an Amiga project then I do agree.
But Amiga developers aren't stupid either.  I'm sure they are under no illusions about how much money they could be expected to make on their project.
But does this mean they should give it away for free? Remember, they've just committed a huge amount of precious time to the project.  If they can make a tenner from it, or a few hundred, or a few thousand, as a tiny amount of compensation for their efforts, then should they not be allowed to do that? And should we not be greatful?

I don't know if the developer(s) are planning to charge any money for their Firefox work (closed source doesn't necessarily mean that) but whatever they decide to do, it really is their decision.  As a user, it's our decision whether to support their project or not (in terms of buying or using it), but we have no right to critisize the licence they decide to use when we've not invested any time at all in the project's development.


AH
 

Offline Fab

Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #31 on: August 07, 2011, 08:47:09 AM »
Quote from: AppleHammer;653481
I'm getting the impression that you're one of those people who believe that software writers have an obligation to release their work on an open source licence and that to do it any other way is somehow incorrect, unfair and unacceptable.

The author is indeed totally entitled to his decision, as long as it follows the original licence, and opensource extremists are annoying.

That being said, when it involves a plain port where the contribution of the porter will only represent a very small fraction of the original code (which is especially true in the case of Timberwolf), i think it's rather inelegant from the porter to keep as much closed as possible (even if the licence allows it).

And i wonder why everyone thinks Firefox is an "incredible amount of work", too. There's not *that* much to do once you have implemented the platform layers, which are rather standard (memory, thread, IO, events, network, gfx layer using cairo, ...)
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 08:53:39 AM by Fab »
 

Offline buzz

Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #32 on: August 07, 2011, 08:47:36 AM »
Quote from: AppleHammer;653488
But does this mean they should give it away for free? Remember, they've just committed a huge amount of precious time to the project.  If they can make a tenner from it, or a few hundred, or a few thousand, as a tiny amount of compensation for their efforts, then should they not be allowed to do that? And should we not be greatful?

Because they are using code that others put 1000x more time into and managed to release the code which they rely on or there would be no browser x y and z, and so it makes no sense to keep the "Amiga" bits closed, for the reason I think so other "Amiga" platforms can't benefit from it.

[edit] + ^what fab said
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 08:50:14 AM by buzz »
 

guest7146

  • Guest
Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #33 on: August 07, 2011, 08:52:30 AM »
Quote from: buzz;653487
Because I put a lot of time into developing on open projects, benefit greatly from open source in general in the software I run (and have the ability to fix it), and dislike the general attitude with amiga development, excluding AROS, where the others do their best to not share any code. There have been plenty of things in the Amiga world that if they had been open source, the situation would now be better. From Filesystems to tcp/ip stacks, to browsers.

You put forwards a good argument.  I don't necessarily disagree with your preference for open source - in fact I share it, as I have already mentioned.

But your preference for open source does not give you the right to critisize a closed source project.  The only thing it gives you is the right to invest your own time in a project (Firefox?) and then you'll be able to choose the licence yourself.

Let's take another example.  Let's look at the new accelerators recently released by Individual Computers.  Very nice kit to have for the classic Amiga, I'm sure you'll agree.  And one person in particular invested a massive amount of time to bring the project to fruition - not just in terms of the time spent on that individual project, but also the time spent on other projects that put him in the position to be capable of developing an Amiga accelerator in the first place.

So why didn't he release the source code for it? And why not the schematics? And hell, while we're on the subject where are the PCB layouts?
He hasn't released them.  Has he got a bad attitude?

Now, I know what you're going to say.  None of his work is based on open source, so it's only fair that he releases it as closed source?

Okay.  But that's no different to what is being done on the Firefox project.  Only the parts that are new are closed.

AH
 

guest7146

  • Guest
Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #34 on: August 07, 2011, 08:53:54 AM »
Quote from: Fab;653490

And i wonder why everyone thinks Firefox is an "incredible amount of work", too. There's not *that* much to do once you have implemented the platform layers, which are rather standard (memory, thread, IO, events, gfx layer using cairo, ...)

Well, that being the case, anyone else is free to invest their own time on the project and make the licence decision for themselves.

AH
 

guest7146

  • Guest
Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #35 on: August 07, 2011, 08:57:34 AM »
I guess what I'm really trying to fight here is the opinion that all software should be open source.  There seems to be this idea that software is valueless, and should be free.  It also seems that a lot of people view software development as easy and not worth paying for.  After all, if you can learn C in 24 hours how hard can it be?

Absolute rubbish of course - as I'm sure most if not all people in this forum would agree.  Throw the 24 hour book away and be prepared for a 10 year time investment (10 years to excel at it, not 10 years before you can start doing any projects).

AH.
 

Offline buzz

Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #36 on: August 07, 2011, 08:59:08 AM »
Quote from: AppleHammer;653493
Well, that being the case, anyone else is free to invest their own time on the project and make the licence decision for themselves.


yeh, well that's how it would be in Amiga land. let there be 3 different Firefox projects then.
 

guest7146

  • Guest
Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #37 on: August 07, 2011, 09:02:30 AM »
Quote from: buzz;653495
yeh, well that's how it would be in Amiga land. let there be 3 different Firefox projects then.

There doesn't have to be 3, there only has to be 1.  But if you're so outraged by the author's licence decision, then the only thing you have a right to do is commit your own time to the work and then release it under any licence you wish.  That's the only point I'm trying to make.  And on that note I think I'm going to agree to disagree as I've made my points and it's pretty pointless to just argue them back and forth - time being the most precious of my assets you understand. :)

AH
 

Offline haywirepc

Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #38 on: August 07, 2011, 09:05:41 AM »
If you get 90% of your work done for you in the way of an open source base, then contribute 10% but refuse to release your contribution...
 
Thats just kind of funny to me. If you want to SELL a browser, then write a browser, don't port an open source one and expect to make money from your port, yet thats whats happening here.
 
I also agree that not releasing it as open means more people will also redo work you've already done for morphos or aros ports.
 
There would be alot more software accross all 3 camps if people shared more, but I suppose that will never happen.
 
For the record, I full support the bounty systems, I just think they should specify once paid the bounty you share your work so others can benefit, or people can continue the work if you as an author choose to stop developing your project.
 
 
Steven
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 09:10:10 AM by haywirepc »
 

Offline Fab

Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #39 on: August 07, 2011, 09:11:06 AM »
Quote from: haywirepc;653497
If you get 90% of your work done for you in the way of an open source base, then contribute 10% but refuse to release your contribution...
 

The proportion would rather be 99% - 1% (or probably less, in fact).
But that work has a value and it's not trivial either. So if the license allows to keep it closed, so be it. It's just a bit greedy from my POV. :)
 

guest7146

  • Guest
Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #40 on: August 07, 2011, 09:12:33 AM »
Quote from: haywirepc;653497
If you get 90% of your work done for you in the way of an open source base, then contribute 10% but refuse to release your contribution...
 
Thats just kind of funny to me.

If 90% of the work was done by a team of 100 developers, and 10% of the work was done by an individual who invested a huge amount of time on it, does that change your opinion at all?

AH
 

Offline Fairdinkem

Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #41 on: August 07, 2011, 12:08:40 PM »
Has anyone bothered to contact Hyperion to see if they will allow Timberwolf to be ported to there chosen platform? There seems to be allot of speculation being tossed around as if they won't release it?

The bounty license says that they have to forfeit the source code if they do not show active development or release a new version after initial release within a 12 month time frame.

In other words as long as TIMBERWOLF is being developed.... i.e. TIMBERWOLF on AmigaOS, TIMBERWOLF on AROS etc etc etc.

Just my two cents worth.
 

guest7146

  • Guest
Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #42 on: August 07, 2011, 02:03:36 PM »
Quote from: Fairdinkem;653520
The bounty license says that they have to forfeit the source code if they do not show active development or release a new version after initial release within a 12 month time frame.

Well I don't think this actually has anything to do with Hyperion, apart from the fact that a Hyperion developer (or perhaps developers)  is working on the project in his spare time?

But if I've understood you correctly, you're saying that the developer must release the source code after a 12 month period of no development activity.  So even if he later abandons development, the source code will then be made available anyway.

If that's the case, I really don't see what the problem is.

AH
 

Offline itix

Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #43 on: August 07, 2011, 03:15:26 PM »
@Fairdinkem

I dont think anyone had intention to port Timberwolf... so in my opinion this open vs closed discussion is useless.
My Amigas: A500, Mac Mini and PowerBook
 

Offline Iggy

Re: Timberwolf Progress Update
« Reply #44 on: August 07, 2011, 05:52:49 PM »
As I intend to continue to use Fab's OWB, Timberwolf is of little significance to me. Without improved Flash support, how many new features does this package bring to the table?
I use Firefox under OSX and Windows, but I don't understand the argument for implementation under Amigoid OS'.

BTW - Thanks for all the improvements to OWB Fab.
"Not making any hard and fast rules means that the moderators can use their good judgment in moderation, and we think the results speak for themselves." - Amiga.org, terms of service

"You, got to stem the evil tide, and keep it on the the inside" - Rogers Waters

"God was never on your side" - Lemmy

Amiga! "Our appeal has become more selective"