Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Opensource your abandonware (2010)

pulkomandy.tk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 61 posts

Re: Opensource your abandonware (2010)

#31

Post by capableweb »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #26
FartyMcFarter wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a mixture of two things: One is a, perhaps misguided, internal fear of being judged. Another one is that prospective employers sometimes look at one's github history.

It's not necessarily misguided. Geeks love to cut up other geeks. As the recipient of a fair bit of that stuff, over the years, it has hardened my resolve to: A) Do a top-notch job on all my code; regardless of whether or not anyone else will ever see it it; and 2) Not pass public negative judgement, in a specific way, on others' code (unless, of course, I am planning to use it). Positive judgement is all good. I wil…

> bad quality of your code from N years ago

> Do a top-notch job on all my code

If you're like most above-average programmers, you constantly evolve. Your code from N years ago should look worse than the code you write today, otherwise you're not really improving are you?

So you completely missed the initial point made by FartyMcFarter, that old code looks worse than what you write today and people might judge you for it.

Re: Opensource your abandonware (2010)

#32

Post by maccard »

syshum wrote: post #27
maccard wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't have the rights to release it you likely don't have the rights to redistribute the api either, so you need to strip that out.

Well I hope then that Google wins against Oracle and we can finally say API's are not copyrightable...

Even if that is the case, there's a difference between an api being copyright protected, and an api being redistributable

Re: Opensource your abandonware (2010)

#33

Post by syshum »

maccard wrote: post #32
syshum wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I hope then that Google wins against Oracle and we can finally say API's are not copyrightable...

Even if that is the case, there's a difference between an api being copyright protected, and an api being redistributable

In what way exactly? Copyright law is the only method a person has to control how it redistributed, if there is no copyright on the API then no one has the legal authority to prevent redistribution.

Re: Opensource your abandonware (2010)

#34

Post by [deleted] »

ghaff wrote: post #21
fsflover wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but the problem is that they have used a third-party library where they cannot legally release because they simply don't have the rights to it. Just release everything else. Someone can write their own library for that or maybe even find a replacement in the open-source world.

Unless it's something wildly popular, to a first approximation, no one is going to go to the effort to get a discontinued game or other software into a usable state given missing libraries, build systems, developer docs, etc. And, as parent noted, it's still quite a bit of work to open source proprietary code even if a company has a genuine interest in doing so. I have first-hand knowledge of situations where a compa…

[deleted]

Re: Opensource your abandonware (2010)

#35

Post by zinekeller »

syshum wrote: post #33
maccard wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if that is the case, there's a difference between an api being copyright protected, and an api being redistributable

In what way exactly? Copyright law is the only method a person has to control how it redistributed, if there is no copyright on the API then no one has the legal authority to prevent redistribution.

Note: US law, obviously (these points are moot in EU due to strong laws for interoperability).

Contracts can legally bind the developer/s with this, more so if it is a corporate entity. Even if Google wins this case and the APIs cannot legally acquire copyright protection, the third-party can sue the developer/s for disclosing trade secrets. The code legally is clean (IP-wise) at this point, but the developer/s have broken a contract with the third-party provider in doing so, and they can sue those developer/s (however, any users of the released code are protected since they are not the signatories/parties to the contract).

Re: Opensource your abandonware (2010)

#37

Post by johannes1234321 »

colonwqbang wrote: post #25
ghaff wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless it's something wildly popular, to a first approximation, no one is going to go to the effort to get a discontinued game or other software into a usable state given missing libraries, build systems, developer docs, etc. And, as parent noted, it's still quite a bit of work to open source proprietary code even if a company has a genuine interest in doing so. I have first-hand knowledge of situations where a compa…

In the second paragraph of the article the author describes how some dependencies of the application were replaced by open-source libraries like SDL. There are also many more examples of this happening. So the assertion that "nobody" would do it is wrong. If the application is interesting, people will find find a way to run it on modern hardware. It's not an excuse not to open-source what you can of your code. This l…

Getting rid of third party's code often isn't as easy as removing a folder and be done. Sometimes third party code is deeply integrated and was patched and can't be isolated or it might be the core component/core engine where the missing make aThe reminder almost useless. Also some vendors put their APIs behind an NDA, thus you not only have to remove the API, but also rework the calling code. (Just for open sourcing fighting whether the NDA is legally clair is quite some effort ...)

This also becomes fun if you worked with external contractors, who committed all over the code and the agreement doesn't cover releasing the code.

And then there are still all the other things in open sourcing (making sure comments are appropriate, naming is appropriate, ...)

And then you have IP besides the source, in artwork where designers often have some rights, copyrights, trademarks ...

And after all that the "fear" on your reputation, if one fears the code might seem of low quality, which might reflect bad. (Whether it's truly bad doesn't really matter, a few blog posts or youtube videos of somebody taking worst parts can harm reputation)

It's all simpler, if you plan on doing that eventually from the start, but notable effort for any serious project after the fact.

Re: Opensource your abandonware (2010)

#38

Post by Ace17 »

Thaxll wrote: post #24
fsflover wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but the problem is that they have used a third-party library where they cannot legally release because they simply don't have the rights to it. Just release everything else. Someone can write their own library for that or maybe even find a replacement in the open-source world.

As if it was just that easy to remove all part of third party code ... For example removing a physic engine from a game is pretty much "impossible".

It depends on how the physics engine has been integrated into your game/engine. The book "Game Coding Complete" shows how to isolate a 3rd-party physics engine so you can switch implementations.

Of course, every physics engine behaves a little differently from the others, so, if you game is physics centered (pinball, racing), switching implementation might result in a slightly different game - but having the core of your game depends on the implementation details of some 3rd-party library might not be a good idea anyway.

In general, the more you sprinkle your code with dependencies to 3rd party libraries, the less control you have over the resulting product.

Your point still stands, though, for some very low-level "utility" libraries like boost or the STL, or any standard library replacement , and more generally, libraries holding "vocabulary" types.

Re: Opensource your abandonware (2010)

#39

Post by miscoinceptions »

merlinscholz wrote: post #6
ksec wrote: post #4

Open Source Flash from Adobe would be great.

I would love Opera's Presto engine to be open sourced. A few days ago I've read taht there are extreme memory optimizations so that it could be run on centralized servers for their Opera Mini variant. Also we really need more browser engines.

Presto is already open source if you know where to look. But you didn't hear that from me ;)

Re: Opensource your abandonware (2010)

#40

Post by merlinscholz »

miscoinceptions wrote: post #39
merlinscholz wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love Opera's Presto engine to be open sourced. A few days ago I've read taht there are extreme memory optimizations so that it could be run on centralized servers for their Opera Mini variant. Also we really need more browser engines.

Presto is already open source if you know where to look. But you didn't hear that from me ;)

While the source is... Accessible... You sadly cannot incorporate it into your own open source browser, which is the main problem. Maybe I'll tinker around with the "open source" version someday
Post reply on HN