Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Splodger
0utbreak Outbreak.
28
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 11:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
I am very curious as to why and the reasoning behind why people release there code to the public.
If you could take a minute to explain if you have and why that would be awesome.
I am adverse to releasing mine, but that's probably more that its a dogs mess and maybe future projects that are more clean I would release.
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
3252
|
Posted - 2014.05.28 12:48:00 -
[2] - Quote
Aside from the benefit of possibly having others contribute and offer suggestions EVE tends to be a game where no one trusts anyone else. Especially when it comes to providing an API key with access to private details, people generally won't do that unless they can see the source code for themselves to ensure bad things are not being done. Lots of bad things have been known to come up before such as send all API keys to someone. CCP FoxFour // Game Designer // @regnerba
|
|
Arnath Othorem
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
1
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 07:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
FoxFour hit two of the big things, which I will confirm. It's great to be able to audit code so you know that the software is not doing anything sketchy with your API keys (or virus'ing your system or whatever). And it's super great to have other people contribute to your projects. (I know I've done some small work on projects I like that are open source.) Even if the only other people who work on your project are alliance- or coalition-mates, having the source easily accessible is better. Every hoop that someone has to jump through to get code access decreases the amount of help you will get.
But, another big reason for publishing source is altruism. (Yes, I know, in Eve this idea is shocking.) The main project I am working on right now is an auth system for managing alliance member keys and providing centralized access to alliance applications. Right now, if a new or small alliance wants software like this but doesn't have a serious IT division, they are stuck. So, in the spirit of helping out newbros, we're working in the open and trying to create software that anyone can use. Obviously it will be a while before we can reach the level of polish and maturity of the software that the big blocs have. But for every new alliance that uses the software, maybe we will gain one or two more people who can help make it better :)
(If you're curious, this is the project: https://github.com/bravecollective/core ) |
Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
78
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 10:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
Open source also has the benefit that people may eventually pick up (for whatever reason(s)) abandoned projects and continue to develop them. EVEWalletAware - an offline wallet manager. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
3254
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 12:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
Hel O'Ween wrote:Open source also has the benefit that people may eventually pick up (for whatever reason(s)) abandoned projects and continue to develop them.
This is also a really big one I think. There are a lot of things running right now that would be dead and gone if they had not been open source. CCP FoxFour // Game Designer // @regnerba
|
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3348
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 13:24:00 -
[6] - Quote
Why have I made the majority of stuff I've done open source?
A few reasons: Ego. (Look at what I've done!) Altruism (I'm a pretty nice guy, most of the time, real world) Laziness. (No, I won't set something up for you. you can do it yourself) Responsibility (Much of what I've done depends on work from other people. it's only right to give back) Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
ItsmeHcK1
Kicked. Shadow Cartel
112
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 16:16:00 -
[7] - Quote
I have chosen not to open source my current projects, the infamous API checker and PocoStats. For the first I decided against it as a matter of principle, I've put WAY too much time into it, it's kind of become my baby, so I want it to stay mine, sort of. If I ever decide to discontinue the development I will release the source though. The latter I decided against open source for practical reasons. It's a very delicate system woven into multiple things running on my server. Offering support for that, which will be expected if you release the source, is simply something I do not have the time or energy for. In theory everyone should be able to deploy it fairly easily, but reality is always different. Strangely enough, the one with the most potential for abuse (the API checker) is much more trusted than the one with virtually no risk. (PocoStats) Possibly because the API checker is run locally on the user's computer, but then wouldn't the risk of a trojan or something increase? Whatever the case, I generally prefer open source as well, for all of the reasons mentioned above. I'm currently working on an alliance management system, (which will be open source once it's ready for a release) integrating a lot of open source products. (Openfire, phpbb, mumble, even Teamspeak, sort of.) That would not be possible if said products were not open source. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2661
|
Posted - 2014.05.29 20:02:00 -
[8] - Quote
i put this the other way around: there is no good reason why you would keep the source closed for most projects.
most initial fears are baseless. for example what if someone steals it, renames it and gets all the cookies? Thats really really unlikely that someone would succeed with it. Since software these days is all about regular updates and maintenance, not about the first release. There are also various licenses you could pick from. So even in the unlikely event you would manage to make money from it, you could still open source it while charging for a service or the sw itself. Google basically open sources everything they have.
Open source also invites for contributions. There is 0 effort involved to fork a project on github, play with it and contribute a change back to the original maintainer if you are a dev. (the original maintainer can still say no to the change of course)
transparency, security... yeah no good reason to not open source it. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
Peter Powers
Terrorists of Dimensions Free 2 Play
236
|
Posted - 2014.05.30 09:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
well, personally i have opensourced just a part of the things i'm doing, for the libraries (pheal/perry/eaal) thats a no brainer - there is no benefit in keeping them for myself, while others can benefit a lot from using them, and the libs benefit from other people working on them as well.
for other stuff that i've opensourced, there is also always the hope to find people who want to join in and help with it - after all there is a limited amount of time that you can spend solo on something.
some stuff i'm not putting opensource, simply because there wouldn't be any benefit. Say opensourcing 3rdpartyeve.net, would - if anyone would pick it up - just result in more pages of the same sort, which would make it harder for the user to find anything. 3rdPartyEve.net - your catalogue for 3rd party applications |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Black Core Alliance
1502
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 15:10:00 -
[10] - Quote
Well, I use sourceforge for free hosting and you need to put code up for public use to get that benefit. That was the first reason I did it for iph.
Other reasons are that maybe, MAYbe, someone could pick up my code after I stop playing and use it.
Recently though, I've found that it's come in handy with reassuring people that I don't have a virus in the code since Norton and avg seem to flag my program at various times.
Other than that, I don't see a huge downside. If you've done any serious coding you know it is hard to work on someone else's code, no matter how elegant they code. My code is so hacked up in some spots because it's been something I've worked on for a few years now and I learn new things all the time. But elegant or "correct" coding I'm not really interested in. I want functionality and since I'm the only one that works on it, it really doesn't matter. GÇ£Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do. GÇ¥ - Dale Carnegie
Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour! |
|
Splodger
0utbreak Outbreak.
29
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 15:13:00 -
[11] - Quote
Cheers for all the replies, really has put perspective and understanding why people do it on an individual level and some great examples etc. |
Aineko Macx
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
296
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 13:34:00 -
[12] - Quote
I released iveeCore as open source to be able to give something back to the community. This gave me the opportunity to play a bit with github hosted projects, but more importantly, it gave me an incentive to improve the quality of the code I was releasing. Actually it required the splitting of the application I was developing into two components, the released library and the actual (private) tool. The latter contains much more secret sauce and messy bits, too. |
Sir Substance
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
653
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 23:54:00 -
[13] - Quote
I choose not to open source my projects.
This is because most of the programming I do for my eve related tools is stuff that falls into the category of "just good enough to solve my personal problem, and in no way intended to be used by other people".
My experience with the open source community is that it's full of elitist jerks, and I don't like being criticized because I chose to solve the problem in a meatball fashion and move on rather then build a marble tower to the heavens. The beatings will continue until posting improves. -Magnus Cortex
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |