some of the comments here are contradictory to themselves.
Quote:
|
I agree with open source. However, for FIRST, I don't think it's necessary because there is a competition aspect to it
|
This is why programs are closed source.. competition. Then an open-source program can best it if they user understands the source.
i.e. Windows vs Linux, Windows is point and click until you figure something out, Linux can be more productive if the user knows what he/she is doing.
Closed vs Open code in FIRST: Closed.. if you hand someone your control system they can make it work by playing with it enough.
If they have read the code and understand it, they'll know how to move stuff around right away.
I understand a lot of teams like the "element of surprise" in not revealing their bot before their first regional but once regionals have started they "open" their bot to the public. Just seeing a bot doesn't mean people know how (or how well) it works. I think that was very obvious this year with teams saying "We're fast" but not saying what fast is and being overestimated when competition comes.
Many teams have neat designs that can't be seen, such as Wildstang's Stang Sense and StangPS. I'm sure many programmers would love to see how these were done and if I'm not mistaken Stang Sense info was released and is now helping other teams.
"Co-opertition" should be the name of the open-sourcing of code in FIRST. (Yes I know this was a game name). I don't think any team could fully implement another team's code for the current year but they can get new ideas for the next year. When one team raises the bar, they
should teach how it was raised so that another team can raise it further and new teams can catch up.