|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
| View Poll Results: (read the post first) Open-source...good or bad in this scenario? | |||
| Good |
|
29 | 80.56% |
| Bad |
|
2 | 5.56% |
| Fuzzy...explain. |
|
5 | 13.89% |
| Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#31
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Open-source FRC code
Instead of all this arguing about GPL vs non-GPL, why don't we just make our own license? As I see it what we need absolutely need is:
1) Redistributable 2) Intellectual property (not like Monster Cables, may they burn in whatever place their religion proscribes to people who rip off innocent customers with imaginary techno-jargon and sue all their competitors over idiotic claims, but just to keep people from saying 'I made this' when they didn't) 3) Compatible with Kevin's license A thing that I think may make teams more likely to post code: 1) An additional clause teams can choose to license their code under if they want to that requires that the code not be used verbatim Anyone else think making our own license is a good idea? |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Open-source FRC code
Or how about something awfully simple, such as the BSD license. It can be used in commercial projects, but the company would still have to attribute the copyright-holder. There's tons of open-source licenses out there besides the GPL, you just have to choose the right one.
Quote:
|
|
#33
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Open-source FRC code
Quote:
You download it, you put it in your project, but realize that you cannot distribute the entire project now--you cannot relicense the entire thing to be GPL. But that's irrelevant--if you are using this for a private use, the GPL does not apply to any of it. From the GPL FAQ: Quote:
I will take into consideration future rule changes, and may write my own license, because we do *not* want teams to copy anything out of this code repository verbatim. JBot |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Open-source FRC code
JBotAlan - Yes, you are correct. GPL is fine for diffs, but you cannot redistribute your code along with Kevin's (which I guess his license prevents anyway). Sorry, I got confused with the whole distribution thing.
I'm surprised you don't want anybody copying the code verbatim though. If you don't want that, why not just release psuedo-ish code to show the process you went through? I'm not sure what the point of making the code open-source is if nobody can use it. I personally believe a publicly available repository of code used by FIRST teams would be a major asset and even contribute to leveling the playing field between teams with huge resources and teams with few resources. Besides, a lot of the code will need to change, unless you release your complete robot plans and someone clones your robot too. I find it unlikely that someone would blindly copy a piece of code into their robot, and have it actually work properly. |
|
#35
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Open-source FRC code
You could just zip up the functions and files that you wrote (minus WPIlib, Kevin Watson's, and/or IFI's code) and upload it to CD-Media as a White Paper, and provide it "as is".
Just remember, we're getting a new Controller in 2009. For all we know they might want us to program it in Scheme*. * Oh the horror. (I (will (never (look (at (a (parenthesis (the (same (way (ever (again)))))))))))). |
|
#36
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Open-source FRC code
Hey, don't knock Scheme too hard. It's a good language to know, and there's a lot of powerful things that can be done with it.
While functional languages (scheme, lisp, ml, etc) are not used nearly as much as procedural languages, it's still useful to know one. Having more tools in your belt (or knowledge in your head) gives you more ways to approach a problem, which will help to make you a better programmer. Once you know any one object-oriented procedural language, like C++ or Java, it becomes very easy to learn another. That does not translate so well to learning a functional language. When reviewing resumes of applicants at work, I always look to see what languages they list. If they include some functional language, I always mentally give them a few bonus points. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Open-Source FIRST | Shinigami2057 | Programming | 21 | 02-02-2007 09:00 |
| Linux/Open Source Apps | Babyhueyhnx | General Forum | 10 | 10-09-2005 18:50 |
| Using open source forum program | zoony | Website Design/Showcase | 4 | 21-01-2005 19:44 |
| Open Source CAD | Jeff Waegelin | Inventor | 5 | 16-12-2004 12:51 |
| Open source | Jeff_Rice | Programming | 16 | 25-03-2003 23:40 |