4 ms·
That seems the opposite of open source thinking, which might be why you didn't published it and why you think that way. As an open source author myself I see th
by franciscop 5y ago
That seems the opposite of open source thinking, which might be why you didn't published it and why you think that way. As an open source author myself I see this as a fair move. Just different opinions :)
"The hard part is building the app, not changing a parameter" that really depends, why didn't you take an open source implementation yourself and built on top of it? Then it wouldn't be "as hard", would it? If you want to go the hard road that's totally fine, but it's not fair to say that because you go that road you deserve something that someone else got easier using pre-existing technology. Also there's literally dozens of famous examples in science and medicine when the hard part is changing a parameter and saving millions of lives.
- Grustaf 5y agoI don’t know if there are open source hatetris available, but in my case it was an assignment so that wasn’t an option. If i build something from scratch it doesn’t really matter that it “could have been” built on open source. And in any case, it might be perfectly legal and in accordance with the license to do what OP did, I’m just saying it’s bad form. Making a minor tweak doesn’t make it “by you”. It just doesn’t. And this is not medicine and lovetris doesn’t save any lives, so I’m bot sure it’s relevant.
- Grustaf 5y agoAlso, I’m not saying it’s a problem to tweak someone’s open source project, I only take issue with presenting it as your own, with such a minimal change.
- frosted-flakes 5y agoIf you want attribution, require it in the licence.
- Grustaf 5y agoMaybe I’m not being clear. I’m talking about _etiquette_. Not licenses or laws.