Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dave Scheck
I disagree with the proposed idea.
My reasoning is that I think that this will punish teams that actually take the time to create well written, reusable code. They have put in the time to create this product....why should they be forced to share this with a team that doesn't put in the effort? What is the motivation of a new team to actually learn how to write code when they can go out and download the prewritten code of their choice? What is the motivation for a team to post their code in a legible format?
If teams want to share a code module, or even their whole codeset, that should be their prerogative.
Would you think the same way if this pertained to mechanical design? Would you force teams to make their gearbox design public if they intended to use it from year to year? (I know that the software/mechanical comparison isn't easily made, but humor me).
|
I tend to agree with Dave. I don't think its fair to compare software with hardware either. I mean honestly, if FIRST requires that we do not use any code from previous years and I have a modular component from a previous years, I could easily take any kid from the team and ask them to re-type it for me maybe just looking off print outs or another computer. It is the exact same thing, and the only thing we accomplish by re-typing the code is spending valuable time. Does this make an even playing field for other teams? If you look at hardware though, you can legally use designs from previous years and all you have to do is re-synthesize the part. This cannot be done by just anyone and requires certain skills, equipment and valuable time. Based on all this, I feel teams should be allowed to develop code and re-use code every year or improvise. I hope you see the difference and I hope FIRST comes up with a solid ground for a rule like this, whatever it may be.