 |
 |
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