|
Post by dw817 on Nov 10, 2008 15:05:46 GMT -5
Hi Tom. Seems like I do my best to avoid Basic4GL and have been looking at other languages to compare against it, and here you go and add some GREAT features (change font/size/Colors !) so I'm back and hopefully kaputz. I think that if you make B4GL open-source, some slick people are going to do one of two things. One, recompile an EXE without the source-changes they've made that deliberately add viruses to one's computer. Two, they'll charge for the updates to what was once a free-to-all program. Hope This Helps ! I - need to stick with B4GL ! It has come a =LONG= way since I last saw it. I am going to see if you can change the playback speed of a .WAV file. I'm going to get back into writing music as I did years ago and want to write my own player-piano (Moog) in B4GL. If it works, I'll post it. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK, TOM ! dw817
|
|
|
Post by Darkjester on Nov 10, 2008 17:46:41 GMT -5
I agree completely, Thats what hardwork from Tom and plugins are for, enhancing bas4gl. Happy coding -Darkjester
|
|
|
Post by Nicky Peter Hollyoake on Nov 10, 2008 17:53:13 GMT -5
Ain't it already open source? The files are availiable on the main website.
One, recompile an EXE without the source-changes they've made that deliberately add viruses to one's computer. Two, they'll charge for the updates to what was once a free-to-all program.
So? They can do that, buy it you're an idiot. It won't be going up on Tom's site anyways so we'll always get the nice clean Basic4GL. - Nicky
|
|
|
Post by Darkjester on Nov 10, 2008 17:55:10 GMT -5
Its not opensource, its code is available for self use basically, you cannot rebadge it as your own thing, and it cannot be an update to toms.
-darkjester
|
|
|
Post by Nicky Peter Hollyoake on Nov 11, 2008 1:20:29 GMT -5
You think people really care? They'll still attempt it. Basicailly it is open-source. We can monify the code, change the name, the icon, etc. Add a few features to it name it "Game Maker 2008" and put it up on a site put it for 20 pounds, and watch all the idiots buy it. I think its that simple anyways ... - Nicky
|
|
|
Post by andrian on Nov 11, 2008 6:47:52 GMT -5
well, Tom does have a copyright, so he does have rights to at least part of it.
|
|
|
Post by Pizzasgood on Nov 13, 2008 14:50:05 GMT -5
People might try it, but that isn't how open source works. It's not like they could actually go in and take down the official version and put up their own. Tom would still maintain full control over that. All they could do is set up their own website and sell their version there.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Rayner on Nov 13, 2008 20:20:00 GMT -5
Well if it does go open source if other people make it and rename it then sells it, can't tom sue them against the terms and agrrement and conditions of b4gl wayne
|
|
|
Post by smc44 on Nov 13, 2008 20:54:59 GMT -5
yea im pretty sure he can
|
|
|
Post by Pizzasgood on Nov 14, 2008 10:51:18 GMT -5
Depends on what license he uses/is-using. You can set them it up so that people can download the source and do whatever they want so long as they don't distribute it to other people. You can set them up so you can distribute it as long as you don't charge money. You can set them up so you can do whatever you feel like.
One of the most common, the GPL, is worded so that you can basically do whatever you want, with the specification that any derivative works must also be released open source and under the GPL. So if you wanted you could modify and sell an open source project, but doing so wouldn't make much sense because you couldn't prevent people from just redistributing it for free.
|
|
zack8686
Posts a bit
gl-Home in wikispace
Posts: 207
|
Post by zack8686 on Dec 31, 2008 7:42:22 GMT -5
If it is so , then that's really great ! But there are still need some improvement in basic4gl. For example , video clips plugin ... But till now its has come so far , it's really a good job .
|
|
|
Post by dw817 on Apr 29, 2009 8:23:28 GMT -5
One problem I see is this. If TOM releases the sourcecode and some other people can compile it. One of two things can happen. One, probably every request that everyone has made that TOM hasn't done yet, will be incorporated. Two, more serious, anachronistic programmers might inject a virus or two, or worse yet, custom write something that just damages your computer or violates your privacy with unwarranted internet access. B4GL works and works well right now because TOM has control over it. If TOM released the source only to a handful of well-trusted people, that might be good. I don't know what the effect would be overall in the long run.
|
|
|
Post by Supermonkey on Apr 29, 2009 14:15:44 GMT -5
dw817: You can download the source now, the discussion was about making it truly open source through a medium such as sourceforge. In this type of controlled environment neither of the issues you've stated should be an issue.
|
|
|
Post by dw817 on Apr 29, 2009 15:09:27 GMT -5
No issues ? Mozilla Firefox sourcecode is listed on sourceforge and I have yet to 100% believe that it doesn't contain any spyware; certainly not its add-ons.
|
|
|
Post by Pizzasgood on Apr 30, 2009 12:51:55 GMT -5
Just because something is open source doesn't mean anybody can modify it.
Yes, anybody can download the source, make changes, and upload the source to their own servers. BUT, they can't just upload it to the OFFICIAL server. That server is controlled by the owner(s) of the code. Only changes that the owners make themselves (or implement on behalf of somebody else, after vetting it thoroughly) are included there.
So yeah, if you go to joe-bob-hacker's website and download a copy of Firefox from him, you don't know what you're getting, but if you get it direct from Mozilla, then you know you're getting the Official version of Firefox.
Add-ons are another story - those are user-made-content. I don't know how much vetting the Mozilla team does of them.
|
|