| |||||||||||||
Releasing the codeReleasing the codePosted May 27, 2004 18:46 UTC (Thu) by Klavs (subscriber, #10563)In reply to: Releasing the code by corbet Parent article: Movable type and "almost free" software I must say that I'm sorry you choose not to release the source of something that is GPL (AFAIK - and so is the changes you have done) - because it's not "pretty" enough (I believe that was your words on why you didn't just open it up). I (also a paying reader) would very much like it if you could just offer CVS access (through sourceforge - no hassle for you then) - so we could have a look at the code - and if you wrote feature-wishlist - perhaps some of us would like the features implemented and decided to do so. Using CVS it would not be too much work to clean up your code yourself (or us the readers just might) - and then merge the new features too. Hope you see the light - with the code in CVS - it can't hurt - and nobody should be so vain - that there code changes to a GPL project, can't stand the light of day IMHO ;)
(Log in to post comments)
Releasing the code Posted May 27, 2004 18:56 UTC (Thu) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] It's not a matter of "pretty enough." The LWN site code certainly has its grungy spots, but I feel reasonably good about it as a whole.The issues are things like doing a serious security audit (which, of course, I should do anyway), a minimum of documentation (the code has a lot of dependencies and is a bit tricky to bootstrap), and a determination of what parts of the code, if any, are to be withheld. I'm a little nervous about releasing the financial code, for example...I can probably get over that, but I have to look at it hard first. There is also the matter of supporting the code release: mailing lists, CVS repositories, dealing with patches, etc. Takes time. Even then, of course, what the community will have is code to make a site that looks like LWN. One should not expect a general-purpose news portal construction system. Anyway, it really is a priority to get the code out; it would be fun if others could use it and improve it, and I see it as simply the right thing to do. The problem is that there are a lot of priorities...
Releasing the code/priorities Posted May 27, 2004 19:32 UTC (Thu) by utoddl (subscriber, #1232) [Link] As a sort of self appointed needler about opening the LWN code base (at least I think I've dredged it up more than any other subscriber), I feel I really must step in at this point and state up front that I totally agree with you. Releasing any body of code has an enormous up-front cost in time and energy. I'm incredibly impressed with the amount of work you manage to get done -- the content, coverage, keeping the site up, etc. It's a fair question, whether the benefits you would receive from the occasional code snippet from us (who are so lazy after all that we've resorted to paying for web content already) would ever justify the effort and time it would take you to open the code as a proper project. My guess is that it might. Eventually. But it probably wouldn't feel like it for a while. Anyway, I hope my occasional needling about opening your code base is taken in the spirit intended. Specifically, I appreciate your efforts and welcome the oppotunity to support them, whether financially in a small way, by word of mouth, or someday perhaps with some code. OTOH, lwn.net works as is, so perhaps contributed code is not really necessary for lwn's well-being right now. Continued production of quality content is, so that's a reasonable priority. Keep up the good work.
Releasing the code Posted Jun 1, 2004 1:14 UTC (Tue) by macfisherman (guest, #6018) [Link] I'd expect to pay more for LWN if the code is released. I think Corbet has the right priorities. I'm paying for the content, not the code.
|
|||||||||||||