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

An apology to open source

chartjs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 259 posts

Re: An apology to open source

#201

Post by rdohms »

Systemic33 wrote: post #87
ayanb wrote: post #29

An open note to Nick's Employers - 1) If you are a technology company, this is Harakiri ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seppuku ). You are alienating every developer who is worth her salt. If you have a recruiting arm, and they are trying to recruit, god be with them. Ofcourse, you think people will never come to know, but this has the potential to be a good story and press will pick it up. I will not be surprised if…

Someone found the company further down; linking to comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5400190 EDIT: Many people have pointed that its not the correct company. EDIT2: http://www.expert-24.com/ seems to be the correct company, and seems more plausible to have IP problem with chart.js (don't got lynch them, seriously!)

Well i guess the company does fit the profile, they even have a "patented expert system platform". Patents.. argh.

Re: An apology to open source

#202

Post by noodle »

sdfjkl wrote: post #153
slashdotdash wrote: post #127

Some alternative JavaScript charting libraries... * Highcharts JS ( http://www.highcharts.com/ ) * Flot ( http://www.flotcharts.org/ ) * NVD3 ( http://nvd3.org/ ) * morris.js ( http://www.oesmith.co.uk/morris.js/ ) * Rickshaw ( http://code.shutterstock.com/rickshaw/ ) * jqPlot ( http://www.jqplot.com/ ) * gRaphaël ( http://g.raphaeljs.com/ ) * YUI charts ( http://yuilibrary.com/yui/docs/charts/ ) * Polychart.js ( htt…

I've used Highcharts in a commercial inhouse project and can confirm it's awesome, well documented, with a ton of examples and the guy is very responsive to support queries. Well worth the few quid asked for commercial use. Also, it uses SVG and is therefore suitable for PDF conversion (which Canvas is not). Have a play: http://www.highcharts.com/demo/

I've used Highcharts in two different production level projects and I think its only okay. In trying to heavily style the graphs and such, there were tons of difficulties, errors, and such. IF what you need is out of the box, though, it does go a long way.

Re: An apology to open source

#203

Post by mturmon »

fakeer wrote: post #145
shin_lao wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have only one side of the story. Maybe the company doesn't have the rights on the code and cannot decide to open source it. Maybe they're making money with the code and open sourcing it is killing the business. Maybe they have a procedure before open sourcing code. If tomorrow I wake up with a developer open sourcing part of the work he does for us I would sure be very unhappy. You just can't condone that kind of…

Nick's words: It had been my final year university project I had been working on for a couple of months

Yes, that is part of one side of the story. But as mentioned, we don't know the whole story.

Re: An apology to open source

#205

Post by grey-area »

Let's not turn into an angry mob please, Internet.

- Nick Downie (chart.js author) on twitter just now.

This is between Nick and his employer at this point, and trying to enact swift internet revenge on his employer is not going to help Nick, particularly when we've only heard one side of the story, it's hard to draw any meaningful conclusion.

Re: An apology to open source

#206

Post by slantyyz »

manmal wrote: post #5

The real question is, what kind of employer shuts down a project like this, cutting themselves off from useful contributions by other people?

"Employer" is not quite so simple. Organizations are multilayered and complex.

In some cases, your whole department (i.e., bosses and bosses' bosses) could be in open support of this project, but the legal department could shut it down.

Hell, the CEO could be even in support of it, but still be overridden by the legal dept for a bunch of valid reasons.

Re: An apology to open source

#207

Post by floatingice »

ayanb wrote: post #29

An open note to Nick's Employers - 1) If you are a technology company, this is Harakiri ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seppuku ). You are alienating every developer who is worth her salt. If you have a recruiting arm, and they are trying to recruit, god be with them. Ofcourse, you think people will never come to know, but this has the potential to be a good story and press will pick it up. I will not be surprised if…

Where does Nick even work? The only people they alienate is someone who has enough time to cyberstalking him to find out...

Agree that its lame though.

Re: An apology to open source

#208

Post by mturmon »

aneth4 wrote: post #181
jetti wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Overtime doesn't apply to white collar workers. Not true. Software developers are mostly exempt, but there are some that will be non-exempt from overtime based on their salary. If the person makes less than $455 a week as salaried or less than $27.63 an hour as an hourly employeed then they will be non-exempt (http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/fairpay/fs17e_computer.htm). However, I have a feeling it would be h…

Sorry, forgot about all those software engineers in the US making less than $455/week or $27.63/hr. Right on.

I have a developer working for me who HR has decided is overtime-eligible, and he makes more like 3x that.

If I understand the law correctly (e.g., http://www.itstime.com/may2006.htm) having pay above the $455/week threshold is only one of the conditions for being overtime-exempt; the other conditions have to do with extent of job responsibility.

Re: An apology to open source

#209

Post by napoleond »

tingletech wrote: post #196
napoleond wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In North America, that is an atypical arrangement. Here in Canada, Waterloo is unique for being one of the few (only?) schools that doesn't claim IP ownership. My university (Manitoba) does, although it is negotiable and for commercially sponsored projects the sponsoring company generally owns the IP. EDIT: From personal experience, I can also tell you that IP policies are less clear at the undergraduate level around…

In California it is more complicated. First there is copyright law -- students and academic personal manual employees own their copyright. The Education code limits how public university students may share notes (a matter of conduct, not copyright). Non-academic personal manual appointments have copyright owned by the university. Students who are not also otherwise employed by the University would own their patents (…

Correct--where I said "IP" above, I should really have said "patents/patent rights". Copyright, to my understanding, becomes more of an issue when publishing, as some (most?) journals are greedy in that regard, but I haven't had to cross that bridge yet.

What you're describing sounds pretty similar to the way it works here, but the gross majority of full-time graduate students in engineering are employed by their universities (as "research assistants" or similar) and thus effectively waive their patent rights.

(FWIW, I think it's great for schools to share in patents which originate within them, but I would like to see students and staff be more well-informed on the subject, and commercialisation efforts which span beyond a single industry--I know of very few schools which have accomplished that.)

Re: An apology to open source

#210

Post by saintx »

Perhaps the reason this resonates so strongly is that it's a painful reminder that, after all of the enthusiasm and excitement of living in the information age, we still live in a world where ideas can be bought and sold. Nothing, not even a good idea, is immune to the corrosive influence of money.
Post reply on HN