LiveCode for the Hobbyists

Matt Maier blueback09 at gmail.com
Sat Feb 27 01:19:32 CET 2016


Okay, I think I follow that. It seems like a very specific case in that you
could just not share the software publically and then there's no conflict.
It sounds like the public use of the compiled software is a nice-to-have.

Maybe in the case that you want to let the world use the software in its
compiled form, but only share the source with a few individuals, you could
host the software as a web app. That way people could interact with it
without ever needing a copy. You could also pay Livecode to host the web
app, thus sending some money their way at the same time.

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:59 PM, [-hh] <hh at livecode.org> wrote:

> > Matt M. wrote:
> > But, if you're a hobbyist, and not charging for what you distribute,
> > why would you need to close the source?
>
> Because, not always but sometimes, you would like to share the code
> with some people only, not with all.
> And at the same time you are willing to share your product with all,
> for free.
>
> Code has also an immaterial value.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>


More information about the use-livecode mailing list