Re: ImageJ + SourceForge

Posted by Steve Milner-2 on Oct 12, 2005; 6:17pm
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/ImageJ-SourceForge-tp3704686p3704688.html

> I'm concerned that, even ImageJ itself is kept in the public
> domain, a connection with SourceForge would encourage plugin
> authors to use the GPL.

I personally think that it would encourage more plugin development of which a majority would probably be GPL. This wouldn't be a problem since there would be no plugin already created. It then allows for comercial users of the software to provide the GPL'd plugins as is without modification or write their own comercial variants.

<snip>

> I don't know what to do when someone requests capability Y that does not
> quite exist and would be easy and fun to provide, but I can't justify doing
> it for free and nobody seems to be stepping up.  

I think that this is where SF.net could help. Since there would be a larger pool of developers there is a better chance for enhancements on free and open plugins.

> I'm trying to create a
> semi-commercial mechanism for this situation, but I'm reluctant to promote
> it and it needs some tuning.

That sounds interesting!

> Maintenance of my free plugins can be hard to prioritize for things that I
> don't need and nobody is paying for.  

> Maybe SourceForge is the answer for some of these issues, but it would be
> necessary to overcome some fear and ignorance.  

Yes, SourceForge doesn't force anyone to use a license. In fact, they have Public Domain as a license option when submitting projects. In any case, my biggest concern is how to get  other developers involved (which is why I have been suggesting source control). I can't wrap my head around giving back code without having a method in place that allows for tracking  Main Branch changes. If I have latest snapshot A, and the current development code is Z and I make modifications and bug fixes to A ... how can I get this to Z without having to recode? It just doesn't seem to lend itself for outside developer collaboration. I am personally a software developer, so it's where my point of view comes from :-).

> In any case, Wayne's opinion is the one that matters.

True. I talked to Wayne off list and he indicated he does not seen the need
for source control.

By the way, I'd like to thank the list for having a reasonable discussion on this! (and for  not booing me off! :-))

Thanks,
Steve