Trying to make economic sense of open sourcing livecode

[David Bovill]

Kevin - building automatic default licensing and easy code submission into
the open source version would go a long long way to making the open source
community effort work. Flickr did this with their built in CC licensing
options, I feel it would be important for the OS version of LC to be
launched with this.

Open stacks without easy community hosting and default licensing will tend
to keep things in the "shareware" domain. Have you any thought, and more
important and planned action at this stage with regard to community
hosting, version control, and default / encouraged licensing? I'd be
interested in contributing and transferring the ownership of
www.livecode.tvto such an effort.

As we discussed earlier, I feel this would be better marketing, and
strategic positioning for this to be an independent community effort, and
have put some thought into the legal structuring of such an enterprise. My
view has always been that this works best for everyone if structured this
way, but with some active support and endorsement from RunRev. That way you
may also garner some more effective organised community support behind the
KickStarter?


On 4 February 2013 17:53, Kevin Miller <kevin at runrev.com> wrote:

> There will be a commercial code escrow option too, but that will be aimed
> at larger companies and be specific to their individual use of the
> platform.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Kevin
>
> Kevin Miller ~ kevin at runrev.com ~ http://www.runrev.com/
> LiveCode: Unleash Your Killer App
>
>
>
>
> On 04/02/2013 17:45, "Mark Wieder" <mwieder at ahsoftware.net> wrote:
>
> >Dr. Hawkins <dochawk at ...> writes:
> >
> >> The OSS branch can never get orphaned.  The commercial branch can,
> >>however ...
> >>
> >> Now I'm musing about ways to deal with that; perhaps an exception that
> >> allows the proprietary standalone to be built if certain events occur?
> >>  a cod escrow?
> >
> >Thank you. I've been waiting for someone to notice this.
> >
> >One of the obstacles to LiveCode's acceptance in the Real World is that
> >there's
> >a single point of failure: what happens if something happens to RunRev?
> >They go
> >out of business (now it's *me* thinking the unthinkable), they get
> >acquired by
> >Larry Ellison, they do the HyperCard thing and just disappear...
> >
> >With a closed source engine and no code escrow we're all out of luck. And
> >that's
> >a serious impediment for any company that's thinking about investing their
> >future in LiveCode as a platform. By open-sourcing the engine we've got
> >several
> >options. The community can take it forward, the code can get forked, our
> >investment is future-proof. The only things that wouldn't be covered are
> >the
> >parts that you would need a commercial license for: stack protection,
> >etc, and
> >that's the same situation we have today. It would be nice if a code escrow
> >arrangement could be worked out for those, but first things first.
> >
> >--
> > Mark Wieder
> > mwieder at ahsoftware.net
> >
> >...now that I've seen "cod escrow" I can't unsee it...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >use-livecode mailing list
> >use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> >Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> >subscription preferences:
> >http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>