This discussion is timely form my pov: in a new job where everyone uses a
MAC.

Agreed with Terry: as a command line tool, it works fine on a Mac but I'd
rather not have to write one-off scripts just to avoid using the UI on a
Mac (which crashes on me a lot). I had a Windows VM installed at work today
just to help w/ MarcEdit stuff.

re: types of machine: Personally, I'd rather he get enough $$$ to purchase
a laptop if he chooses ... the software helps a lot of people earn part of
their paycheck. Myself included.




On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Cary Gordon <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> IMHO:
>
> 1) If you create something, and you are not under contract to another
> entity, you own it as intellectual property, and you can do whatever you
> want with it.
>
> 2) Open source and even free and open source does not imply any
> contribution model or the licensee's right to have input into development
> and maintenance. The open source licenses that I am familiar with do not
> confer any ownership on the licensees.
>
> 3) Under the major open source licenses, licensees are free to fork the
> project, with certain restrictions, such as identifying the source and
> inheriting the license.
>
> I support Terry's right to do whatever he wants with his work. That said,
> I encourage him to consider moving to open source, where he might learn to
> love the pull request. Probably not all of them, though.
>
> Cary
>
> > On Apr 6, 2015, at 10:49 PM, Roy Tennant <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > I agree with Terry. His decisions on how to deal with his codebase has
> > stood the test of time. Open source doesn't mean squat if no one steps up
> > to maintain it (and I have some experience with that), so having someone
> > dedicated to maintaining it is not a bad strategy. It may not beds the
> most
> > politically correct solution, but so be it. Running (and maintained) code
> > trumps everything.
> > Roy
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Terry Reese <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Bill,
> >>
> >> Sure -- this has been asked before.  In fact, I wrote an article about
> the
> >> responsibilities developers and organizations have, regardless of if
> they
> >> utilize a closed or open source model in the C4L Journal back in 2012:
> >> http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/6393.
> >>
> >> In my case, it's been two things.  Until around 2006 or 2007, MarcEdit's
> >> code libraries were still largely written in assembly so there was very
> >> little interest.  But since migrating the code to something more
> accessible
> >> (C#),  I'd have to say that the main reason is that work on the project
> >> has, and continues to be, a hobby and avenue for me to pursue something
> >> that I happen to be quite passionate about.
> >>
> >> --tr
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> >> William Denton
> >> Sent: Monday, April 6, 2015 7:46 PM
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Native MarcEdit for MacOSX
> >>
> >> On 6 April 2015, Terry Reese wrote:
> >>
> >>> What I've offered is that I'd redo the application to provide a native
> >>> Mac App that is Mac-Native while still making use of the present
> >>> assembly code.  This of course requires a Mac of some kind -- and
> >>> since I'm not a Mac user, there it is.  From the users perspective, it
> >> should all be Mac-tastic.
> >>
> >> I've always been curious, and now seems a good time to ask: I'm sure
> >> you've considered, and been asked about, releasing MarcEdit under a free
> >> software license, but decided against it.  Why?
> >>
> >> Bill
> >> --
> >> William Denton ↔  Toronto, Canada ↔  https://www.miskatonic.org/
> >>
>



-- 
Nitin Arora
nitaro74 (at) gmail (dot) com
"Hope always, expect never."

humaneguitarist.org
blog.humaneguitarist.org