Such commitment

Story: Going Open Source, Almost There!Total Replies: 17
Author Content
caitlyn

Jun 05, 2012
8:32 AM EDT 		If he didn't get $4,000 in contributions by an arbitrary deadline this is the result:
Quoting:So. Very. Close.

Oh well. Too bad. Guess everything stay’s closed source.
Such a commitment to Open Source. I tell you, that's dedication.... NOT!

I'd like to tell him what to do with his software...
ComputerBob

Jun 05, 2012
8:39 AM EDT 		I don't understand how it works - does he still get to keep the money?
caitlyn

Jun 05, 2012
8:43 AM EDT 		He doesn't say anything about returning it. I may be wrong but it would seem, based on reading his blog, the answer is yes, he'll keep it as contributions to his closed software development.
cgagnon

Jun 05, 2012
10:48 AM EDT 		I believe a further read was in order...just sayin

Quoting: Just kidding. To get this close and call it off would be just plain silly.

Here’s the thing: The deadline of midnight tonight was arbitrary. I had to chose a deadline, so this seemed as good as any.

So I’m extending the goal line out by a few days. Let’s, say, Friday. At sundown. In Seattle, WA [aka 9:05 PM Pacific Time]. Another, even more, arbitrary deadline. But that gives plenty of time to meet the goal.



To me personally caitlyn your comment comes across as FUD through omission
JohnPhys

Jun 05, 2012
11:08 AM EDT 		@ComputerBob @caitlyn

He addressed what happens if the goal isn't hit in his original post on the topic. He will return all of the money. See the "What if it Doesn't Work" section towards the bottom of the post.

http://lunduke.com/?p=3372

It's fun to assume things to attack people, apparently.
caitlyn

Jun 05, 2012
12:27 PM EDT 		No, I wasn't attacking him. I was going by the one linked post. I appreciate, @JohnPhys, that you took the additional time I didn't have this morning to read all the way through it.

@cgagnon: Any arbitrary deadline is ridiculous.
notbob

Jun 05, 2012
2:25 PM EDT 		This guy must have a nut sack the size of Portugal. Charging $$ for software with all the sophistication and resolution of an 1st gen Sinclair?? Get this guy outta here!

nb
lordpenguin

Jun 05, 2012
4:57 PM EDT 		Lunduke...

http://www.thepowerbase.com/2012/06/pulling-a-lunduke-holdin...
tracyanne

Jun 05, 2012
9:27 PM EDT 		@notbob, his programming tool - Illumination Software Creator - is not unsophisticated. It's actually a very useful tool, which, I believe, if it was open sourced (right), would become even better.

I once used a tool, that worked in a similar manner, on a Windows 3.11 system, it emitted compiled C code when you ran a build on it. Google are also making something similar available for developing apps for Android.

Having an open source (preferably GPL) version of the same idea would be an excellent idea.
mortenalver

Jun 06, 2012
3:15 AM EDT 		Caitlyn: you didn't have to read any other posts. The sentence following what you quoted was "Just kidding", so using that quote to ridicule him is completely unfair. You should be able to admit as much.
ComputerBob

Jun 06, 2012
9:21 AM EDT 		He reached his goal: http://lunduke.com/?p=3422

FTA:
Quoting:...I will be compiling together statistics and information from the past 8 days on how, specifically, this all came together. Traffic, donation statistics, press information, etc. My hope is that other indie developers can utilize this information to help them to do something similar. A detailed and viable case-study.
caitlyn

Jun 06, 2012
10:15 AM EDT 		Did you read lordpenguin's blog post? I think that made a lot of sense. So, no, I don't think ridiculing his methods is unfair at all.
ComputerBob

Jun 06, 2012
10:33 AM EDT 		I quoted lunduke's latest blog post because I see it as a stark contrast to the blog post to which lordpenguin linked.
JohnPhys

Jun 06, 2012
10:56 AM EDT 		@caitlyn My apologies for misinterpreting the tone of your post. It irritated me and I shouldn't have responded at that time.

Regarding the blog post by @lordpenguin , there is one aspect that I have a question about, as I don't know of any comparable projects off the top of my head:

In the blog post, the author mentions that Lunduke misses the point of the GPL, that he could still sell the binaries while allowing access to the source code. The author argues that, since Lunduke already makes applications with DRM and makes his monthly income, very few people are attempting to pirate his software, and are paying because they want to support development. Thus, releasing the source code should change things very little.

My question is: what about the effect of redistributing by a major distro? As far as I know, if the source is GPL'd, you can redistribute the source however you want, though I'm not too clear on redistributing you *own* compiled binaries, though I think this is allowed. So, what happens if someone uploads the source to ubuntu/debian/fedora/openSUSE, such that a large fraction of Linux users have legal access to the software through their package managers without going through the author's site? If this is a possibility, I could certainly see Lunduke's concern, and it deflates a large portion of the blog-post-author's argument.

Thoughts? To be clear: I'm not asking if people think he's being less-than-noble with holding the code "hostage", or their opinions on his views of the GPL, or their opinions of his views on Stallman, etc. I just want to know 1.) could a large distro redistribute the compiled source? and 2.) Are there any comparable projects that have available source / paid-binaries that are financially successful on a multi-year basis? Please don't count RedHat, that's a *bit* larger than the software he makes, and compiling the source is a bit daunting, as indicated by CentOS release dates a little while ago.
caitlyn

Jun 06, 2012
11:14 AM EDT 		@JohnPhys: You can open the source code and still limited redistribution. In that case the software could meet the Open Source Definition but fail to meet the Free Software Foundation's definition of Free software. A good example of this was the ion window manager prior to 2009. Tuomo Valkonen used a modified LGPL license to restrict redistribution to insure distros would not include outdated development versions of his software in their repositories. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_ %28window_manager%29 and http://tuomov.iki.fi/software/

I am not advocating such licenses. I am simply pointing out that there are approached Brian Lunduke could take regarding licensing to protect his interests and income.

I'd also point out that if you produce really exceptional FOSS code enough people will voluntarily support the project in one way or another. Linux Mint is probably the best known example of this.
Steven_Rosenber

Jun 06, 2012
3:00 PM EDT 		Do you listen to "The Linux Action Show," on which Lunduke is a co-host?
caitlyn

Jun 06, 2012
4:27 PM EDT 		I honestly never heard of it before today.
Steven_Rosenber

Jun 06, 2012
10:12 PM EDT 		The hosts are extremely exhuberant.

Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]

Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!