3 ms·

I mentioned this in an above comment - here is a repo that I use in two of my apps that I compile with pyinstaller and distribute: https://github.com/Capsize-G

I mentioned this in an above comment - here is a repo that I use in two of my apps that I compile with pyinstaller and distribute: https://github.com/Capsize-Games/aihandler/blob/master/setup.py https://github.com/Capsize-Games/aihandler/blob/master/setup... There are hundreds if not thousands of developers who have contributed to those libraries and the dependencies of those libraries. Are you saying that you feel it is up to someone (myself or some service) to track down and verify the identity of each of these developers, and that I shouldn't use these libraries or distribute them until that happens?

ChrisMarshallNY 3y ago
Like I said, if I use someone else’s stuff in my work, it’s my responsibility to assure myself, and anyone upstream, of the veracity of that work. That’s the theory behind efforts like ISO-9000, but I find them pretty “top-heavy.” A good example might be Linux. There are thousands of contributors, but Linux is backed by one of the best (and harshest) developers on Earth. He puts his personal stamp on it, and has trained a bunch of others to be equally insistent on Quality. Git is the same (I believe that you may find some "relation" to Linux). In fact, Git has probably had a bigger impact on the world than Linux, and he put that out in ten days, as a side project. The deal is, that he is used to developing software to be used as infrastructure, and that takes some serious Discipline. That kind of Discipline is actually fairly rare, these days. If someone has it, you can rely on almost anything they do. The quality of the guarantor is an important component of almost any working relationship. Standards bodies try to avoid that, but I'm not confident it works. The one thing that I remember from working in ISO-9000 environments, was myriad ways to work around the requirements. They end up actually causing more problems than they solve. There's really no way to avoid the need for personal and institutional Integrity.

ChrisMarshallNY 3y ago

Like I said, if I use someone else’s stuff in my work, it’s my responsibility to assure myself, and anyone upstream, of the veracity of that work. That’s the theory behind efforts like ISO-9000, but I find them pretty “top-heavy.” A good example might be Linux. There are thousands of contributors, but Linux is backed by one of the best (and harshest) developers on Earth. He puts his personal stamp on it, and has trained a bunch of others to be equally insistent on Quality. Git is the same (I believe that you may find some "relation" to Linux). In fact, Git has probably had a bigger impact on the world than Linux, and he put that out in ten days, as a side project. The deal is, that he is used to developing software to be used as infrastructure, and that takes some serious Discipline. That kind of Discipline is actually fairly rare, these days. If someone has it, you can rely on almost anything they do. The quality of the guarantor is an important component of almost any working relationship. Standards bodies try to avoid that, but I'm not confident it works. The one thing that I remember from working in ISO-9000 environments, was myriad ways to work around the requirements. They end up actually causing more problems than they solve. There's really no way to avoid the need for personal and institutional Integrity.