18 Sep
2013
18 Sep
'13
11:36 p.m.
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 14:29:02 -0700
"J. Liles" <malnourite(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Fons Adriaensen
<fons(a)linuxaudio.org>wrote;wrote:
This is not about ego, it is about politness are recognition. A part of the motivation of
creating open source software of any kind is creating a "brand name" from your
name. Because there is no other positive feedback then happy users and the usage of your
software. Other commercial things like getting paid, a pat on the back from your boss,
some magazine prizes or whatever usually don't happen.
And of course forks are an important part of the open source culture and there are many
reasons to create a fork. But if you do it be polite and nice and notify the original
author so she or he (in this case fons) can port back interesting or good changes.
Especially in a scene and community like Linux Audio where it is actually possible to know
most of the persons names and projects by name.
I don't think that is too much to ask for.
I look forward to the new Aeolus version. Thank you, please keep up the good work Fons.
Many people (I know personally) use your software and are very statisfied. Me included.
Nils
http://www.laborejo.org
Hello all,
It has come to my attention that there are ATM at least two
'forks' of Aeolus. The first by the MuseScore team, the second
by one Maurizio Gavioli.
Neither of them even had the decency to let me know of their
work, and both are taking Aeolus in a direction I do not
approve of. Gavioli has even added his 'copyright' to the
sources of the libraries that Aeolus depends on but which
are not part of its source distribution. Apparently the
intention is to release incompatible versions of those as
well.
If this is typical for the attitude taken by the Linux Audio
community then my motivation to contribute to it will take
a serious blow.
As announced previously, there will be a fully reworked
release of Aeolus next year (on the occasion of its 10th
birthday). Apart from major improvements to the audio code
it will be completely OSC controlled. None of this will be
compatible with the forks of course, they'll find themselves
instantly obsolete. And I will make sure that this sort of
thing won't happen again, even if that means a more restrictive
license.
Ciao,
Respectfully, you granted people the right to fork your code in the first
place. Now you say you might take this right away, but why? How has it
harmed you or anyone else? Why should you have been notified that a fork
took place? The whole point of free software is that people can adapt it to
their needs and share their changes with those with similar needs. If those
forks are better suited to the task at hand than your original code, then
people may well use them (and that's a good thing!). If your new release is
better, people may well use that. Isn't that the point? To help people?
Plus, if the forks did/do make any improvements that you value, hey, that's
great merge them, not that I think you'd ever do that ;-)
We can't all be all things to everybody all the time. The value of your
projects isn't necessarily in the complete package with your name on it. If
someone takes your engine and slaps a new interface on it that people like
better, well, they still use your engine, right? It's hard to put your ego
aside sometimes, but I really recommend that you do. You've contributed a
lot to Linux Audio and I'd hate to see that ruined by bruised egos and
non-free licenses.