123

Releasing a project under the MIT license is giving people permission to fork the project. Part of the philosophy behind free software is to give users and developers the right to use, modify, and release the software in ways that wouldn't normally be allowed. If you don't want people to do this, then don't use the MIT license. You can't really complain when ...


102

This is a symptom of a wider migration towards distributed version control systems. Some websites which traditionally hosted non distributed VCS (eg Codeplex & SourceForge) were a little slow in adding support for DVCS (eg Git or Mercurial). So, people who wanted to use DVCS for their project were forced to migrate their projects over to the providers ...


76

Was Xamarin's action and the way the action was done ethical or not? Well, let's ask an expert - The Open Source Initiative's listing of the MIT License itself, with the license quoted in its entirety: The MIT License (MIT) Copyright (c) Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and ...


69

CI-driven development is fine! This is a lot better than not running tests and including broken code! However, there are a couple of things to make this easier on everyone involved: Set expectations: Have contribution documentation that explains that CI often finds additional issues, and that these will have to be fixed before a merge. Perhaps explain that ...


65

Ask the maintainers. Coding style is a quite subjective discussion, and rules like maximum line length of 80 characters are fairly subjective - while general agreement should be that shorter lines are better to read, 80 might be too restrictive for some with today's screen sizes and IDE's. Other rules can be ignored on purpose, too. For instance, a ...


60

Because it's extra effort to create and maintain such a document, and too many people don't understand the associated benefits. Many programmers aren't good technical writers (although many are); they rarely write documents strictly for human consumption, therefore they don't have practice and don't like doing it. Writing a code overview takes time that you ...


55

You can quit. Not the most constructive thing to do, but sometimes it's the only option. If you do, don't sit around and moan about how you had to give it up, take that energy and put it straight into something else - 'move on' in other words. You can fork it. There's no reason why you have to work with anyone. Fork, improve the code and let the others ...


55

I believe on the contrary that you should release an open source software as soon as possible. There is no "too soon" for that (but it should compile). Or at least publish the source code very early and continuously (e.g. by frequent pushes on github), without making formal releases. However, it is very important to flag it as alpha or beta stage, and if ...


54

Why not let this eager person send you a pull request? You'll have the opportunity to review and critique that person's code. This seems like the simplest solution.


51

First of all, remember: shipping is a feature. It's better to release something imperfect than to release nothing at all. The other thing to note is that these are Hobby projects. If you don't meet deadlines or lose interest it's not a big deal. You're doing the project for fun after all.


49

You seem to be motivated largely by respect for the authority of the rubocop tool and the Ruby Style Guide, which the maintainers may not share. They already have their own style, and are used to it, so any change would affect everyone working on the project, and that's a lot of work, especially if the project is large. Consider the motivations of the ...


49

This is a dilemma: you cannot close the issue as "fixed", because you don't actually know if it was fixed, or at least even if some issue was fixed, you don't actually know whether this was the issue the reporter was talking about. On the other hand, you don't want to leave an issue that might have been fixed open, especially if you won't ever be able to ...


47

Section 4 of the Apache License 2.0 is quite clear on what you must do when you distribute the changed file: You must not remove the existing copyright claim (the one by 'the Best Company in the World') You must make it clear the the file has been changed. The easiest way is to simply add your copyright after the original ones: Modifications copyright (C) ...


45

Project hosting is infrastructure. Infrastructure exhibits network effects, which means that infrastructure gets more useful the more people are connected to it. (In particular, the usefulness is O(number_of_connections), which means that for any individual member it is O(total_members) and for the whole system it is O(total_members^2)). This, in turn, leads ...


43

The commercial software would need to include the copyright notice for the work it has used. It doesn't mean the entire commercial work is then licensed under the MIT license. For example, I would expect to see the copyright notice for the commercial software, with the following wording added: This software includes the Yannbane Awesome Library: ...


41

The problem is that in order to call something "Java" you need to get it certified as compliant to the Java spec. One of the pre-requisites of getting this certification is running you JVM through a test suite - Java Technology Compatibility Kit (TCK). This test suite is NOT open sourced. So you can build a JVM that behaves in a very Java like way and be ...


41

Membership in an OSS project is not the same as a funded, corporate team where people are interviewed and chosen. The source is already out there (it isn't open source otherwise). Tell them to send in some patches. If they are good patches (and you must review them first), commit them. Once the prospect builds up trust and a a history of making valuable ...


41

I'm guessing this is not a project at a workplace where you are a paid employee and something you do in your spare time for free? If you are making no money from this, then clearly there is no incentive for you, and no incentive for anyone else to come in fresh to deal with it. (unless maybe it is for a charity or similar voluntary organisation) As an ...


41

I haven't had this situation yet, but that's what I would try: Try contacting the owner Maybe they really lost interest, but are willing to transfer the project to somebody else, in particular someone who has already shown considerate commitment. But perhaps they are just occupied with something else (work, vacations, illness, other projects) and didn't ...


39

You've made it a little unclear exactly what your role is here. The answer depends on how you fit in. If you're leading the project and control the git repository Take back control. If this guy is making commits you don't like without consulting you, remove his direct commit access. He can fork the project and make pull requests to merge his commits. ...


38

Rule #1: Don't ask to ask Rule #2: Behave as you would do in a real life conversation Rule #3: Be patient. If there is no activity, it usually means that no one has read what you wrote yet. If no one responds, they don't know or didn't notice. You can re-try after a while, or ask if anyone has any clue with regards to your question x minutes ago. Also, ...


37

Of course it is OK: it is hard to imagine that over 4,098,118 projects currently hosted on GitHub would all be 100% great and useful! You are not forcing anyone to use your code or even to look at it. If you host the project primarily for yourself, the quality of your code is of concern to you, and nobody else. You listed all the right reasons to host your ...


35

£100/month? How much do you cost? How much is going to cost your training? If it's £100/month but you can get a .NET app up in a month, while you will need at least 3 to 6 months to get your node.js/C++ app running, go for the .NET. Seriously. Your time is way more expensive than these little £100/month. Ideally, yes, you're right in your analysis. What ...


35

That would not be an Open Source license by the definition of the Open Source Initiative: 5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons. Rationale: In order to get the maximum benefit from the process, the maximum diversity of persons and groups should be equally ...


34

It depends on which license. There are some free software licenses that are specifically designed to prevent people from doing stuff like that, such as the GNU GPL. They're known as "viral" licenses, because their licensing terms spread to any code you use them with, which keeps you from using a GPL library in a non-GPL (or compatible) program. Other ...


34

Building a sustainable plugin model requires that your core framework expose a stable interface that plugins can rely on. The golden rule is that you can introduce new interfaces over time but you can never modify an already published interface. If you follow this rule, you can refactor the implementation of the core framework all you want without fear of ...


33

Many open source applications have closed source licensing options for just this scenario. How much you charge them is dependent on: the size of the company (how much can they afford) what they're going to do with it (if they're stealing it or just using it) what they expect you to do (support/updates/extensions? what contractual level?) a ton of other ...


32

After 30 years of professional software development, I still create bugs. I still find patterns I don't know. I still learn from my colleagues, and encounter stuff I don't know every day. Most experienced developers will judge you on how you respond to issues and criticism, whether you learn from your mistakes and improve your product to meet the users' or ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible