New answers tagged

0

How can the problem be overcome? Unless you are willing to write your own text editor or shell solution, I hardly see how you can overcome the problem unless you simply instaure a protocol of some sort that would simply forbid concurrent access (but also forbid concurrent collaboration). The best I can imagine would be a split screen setup, each client in ...


2

There are many, many things that need considering that might make an off-the-shelf solution problematic. Some of the most important ones are: completeness - does it do the job you need entirely, or are you going to be spending time learning its internals in order to extend it robustness - does it do its job well, without needing constant workarounds for ...


-1

To be honest, the most important thing of Git for myself when I see it: 1. Network Graph or Should I call the History(also commenting) 2. Branch and Pull Request 3. It's more powerful, really, I would say it's so feels like I have a secretary holding all my work, and I can told that sec to wrote down anything for me, the change, everything! 4. It's easy to ...


0

Open source software should be developed by different contributors in decentralized fashion. Taken to its extreme, that's a recipe for chaos. Open source that has been forked, re-forked, and re-re-forked is rarely as successful as is open source that has some central organization guiding it and keeping it sane. I'll look at what is arguably the most ...


1

There are several questions and misunderstandings in your question. Let's address them one-by-one: Why do we call Java open source I have no idea. Java is a programming language. A programming language is a set of abstract mathematical rules and restrictions. It doesn't really make sense to apply the ideas of "open source" to a language, because there ...


12

Why do we call Java open source, when development or contributions are not decentralized? The definition of "Open Source" provided by the Open Source Initiative makes no mention of accepting contributions, or how software should be developed. You can read it here: The OSI's "The Open Source Definition" page or the annotated version. Wikipedia (with some ...


1

Sure. The GPL. There are many companies that make money by providing services and support for an open-source project. The GPL insures that no other company can take the code private and turn it into a proprietary application. You can also go with a Dual-Licensing model, like Sencha does. The motivation for paying for a commercial license is that you don'...


-1

The Creative Commons NonCommercial-ShareAlike license might be a close match. They have a license chooser tool if you want to see variations on the license. I would suggest talking to a lawyer who understands software licensing to make sure the license is worded to do what you want without surprises.


2

When converting a program from one source language to another source language, you create a derivative work. It's the same principle than a translation into a foreign language of a book. Law is heavily dependent on your jurisdiction. But the general principle is: you need the authorisation of the copyright holder to create a derivative work. ...


2

The MIT license is a liberal license that basically says that you can do anything with the code that you want to, including making it closed source, translating it to another language, and so forth. The MIT License (MIT) Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a ...


17

In the year 2000, Borland released the code to its InterBase database software as open source. For weird corporate politics reasons, they quickly walked it back and decided that further development of InterBase would continue as a proprietary product, as it had before, and they were able to do that. As noted above, they were the copyright holder and they ...


16

Is that possible with me as the original copyright holder (with no one having contributed changes except me)? Yes, of course. It's your code, you can do whatever you want with it. Even if I release my program as open source, I am the copyright holder after all, am I? Yes, of course. If you weren't, you wouldn't be able to release it as open source, ...


7

As the original copyright holder and no one else holding the copyright to any portions of the project, you can choose to close-source a later version. You can also choose to change the license on previously released versions. It won't stop anyone from using the version(s) under the license they received it under, though.


0

The normal practice is that all files written as part of one project are all provided under the same copyright license. This means that you should at least copy over the license text that is used in the other (source) files in the project. Whether you should add your name to the copyright statement can't really be answered by us. It depends mostly on how ...



Top 50 recent answers are included