6 ms·

Relying on a commercial product means you don't have the source code, means you're dependent on where they move in the future, means you're screwed if they shut

Relying on a commercial product means you don't have the source code, means you're dependent on where they move in the future, means you're screwed if they shut down.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
voxic11 2y ago
That isn't true at all. Many commercial products are source code available including this one https://github.com/vvvv/VL.StandardLibs https://github.com/vvvv/VL.StandardLibs
- Nullabillity 2y ago
  That's the standard library. From a quick search, I get zero relevant matches on their account for "runtime", "compiler", "interpreter", or "editor". Looking over https://thegraybook.vvvv.org/reference/extending/overview.html https://thegraybook.vvvv.org/reference/extending/overview.ht... I see a few references to contributing to their libraries, but nothing about compiling the language core itself. And even then, their library distribution mechanism seems to be NuGet, with all of its binary-first warts.
  - Nullabillity 2y ago
    There's also a huge difference between "you have the source code" and "you're legally allowed to use it".
DrSiemer 2y ago
With this software you'll typically create one-off installations, no maintenance necessary. I don't expect to get the source code for every tool I use in production.
- Nullabillity 2y ago
  > I don't expect to get the source code for every tool I use in production. You should. > With this software you'll typically create one-off installations, no maintenance necessary. And then just accept that it's lost afterwards? No thanks.
  - DrSiemer 2y ago
    > You should. In a perfect world, sure. But most of us, alas, have to live in the real world, where these are considered unreasonable expectations. People need to get paid. That includes the developers who work on unusual niche products like this. > it's lost afterwards It's not lost. It just can't be repurposed, in the unlikely situation that VVVV just disappears completely. Which isn't really a problem for most projects in this space, which are often highly experimental and unique.
    - Nullabillity 2y ago
      > But most of us, alas, have to live in the real world, where these are considered unreasonable expectations. Only because they're enabled by people like you.
      - DrSiemer 2y ago
        Ok, so enlighten me. How would this open-source everything world work? How would companies protect their investments in research and proprietary technology? How will you guarantee security, besides depending on the nebulous "the community will fix it"? Who's in charge of the direction development will take? How will you prevent fragmentation in different branches? What creates a drive for innovation if you take out competition? How will you enforce quality control? And, most of all, how will developers make money?
        Nullabillity 2y ago
        > Ok, so enlighten me. How would this open-source everything world work? You're the one trying to sell this garbage. > How would companies protect their investments in research and proprietary technology? Should they be able to hold their users hostage like that? > How will you guarantee security, besides depending on the nebulous "the community will fix it"? Haha. Hahahaha. Remember SolarWinds? LastPass? Microsoft? > Who's in charge of the direction development will take? You are, for your branch. You don't have to merge every patch sent your way. You don't have to merge any patch sent your way! > How will you prevent fragmentation in different branches? You don't. It's that "competition" thing you claim to love so much. > What creates a drive for innovation if you take out competition? There are so many unexamined priors that this sentence takes for granted that it's not even wrong, and crosses into pure nonsense. > How will you enforce quality control? You… don't merge patches that don't meet your requirements…? > And, most of all, how will developers make money? Ideally, grants and crowdfunding are pretty much the VC model without the middlemen trying to get rich(er).

Relying on a commercial product means you don't have the source code, means you're dependent on where they move in the future, means you're screwed if they shut down.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

voxic11 2y ago

That isn't true at all. Many commercial products are source code available including this one https://github.com/vvvv/VL.StandardLibs https://github.com/vvvv/VL.StandardLibs

Nullabillity 2y ago
That's the standard library. From a quick search, I get zero relevant matches on their account for "runtime", "compiler", "interpreter", or "editor". Looking over https://thegraybook.vvvv.org/reference/extending/overview.html https://thegraybook.vvvv.org/reference/extending/overview.ht... I see a few references to contributing to their libraries, but nothing about compiling the language core itself. And even then, their library distribution mechanism seems to be NuGet, with all of its binary-first warts.
- Nullabillity 2y ago
  There's also a huge difference between "you have the source code" and "you're legally allowed to use it".

DrSiemer 2y ago

With this software you'll typically create one-off installations, no maintenance necessary. I don't expect to get the source code for every tool I use in production.

Nullabillity 2y ago
> I don't expect to get the source code for every tool I use in production. You should. > With this software you'll typically create one-off installations, no maintenance necessary. And then just accept that it's lost afterwards? No thanks.
- DrSiemer 2y ago
  > You should. In a perfect world, sure. But most of us, alas, have to live in the real world, where these are considered unreasonable expectations. People need to get paid. That includes the developers who work on unusual niche products like this. > it's lost afterwards It's not lost. It just can't be repurposed, in the unlikely situation that VVVV just disappears completely. Which isn't really a problem for most projects in this space, which are often highly experimental and unique.
  - Nullabillity 2y ago
    > But most of us, alas, have to live in the real world, where these are considered unreasonable expectations. Only because they're enabled by people like you.
    - DrSiemer 2y ago
      Ok, so enlighten me. How would this open-source everything world work? How would companies protect their investments in research and proprietary technology? How will you guarantee security, besides depending on the nebulous "the community will fix it"? Who's in charge of the direction development will take? How will you prevent fragmentation in different branches? What creates a drive for innovation if you take out competition? How will you enforce quality control? And, most of all, how will developers make money?
      - Nullabillity 2y ago
        > Ok, so enlighten me. How would this open-source everything world work? You're the one trying to sell this garbage. > How would companies protect their investments in research and proprietary technology? Should they be able to hold their users hostage like that? > How will you guarantee security, besides depending on the nebulous "the community will fix it"? Haha. Hahahaha. Remember SolarWinds? LastPass? Microsoft? > Who's in charge of the direction development will take? You are, for your branch. You don't have to merge every patch sent your way. You don't have to merge any patch sent your way! > How will you prevent fragmentation in different branches? You don't. It's that "competition" thing you claim to love so much. > What creates a drive for innovation if you take out competition? There are so many unexamined priors that this sentence takes for granted that it's not even wrong, and crosses into pure nonsense. > How will you enforce quality control? You… don't merge patches that don't meet your requirements…? > And, most of all, how will developers make money? Ideally, grants and crowdfunding are pretty much the VC model without the middlemen trying to get rich(er).