| Author |
 Topic  |
|
sji2671
Junior Member
United Kingdom
185 Posts |
 Posted - 18 September 2002 : 19:39:10
|
I don't think the updating or activity of newer members working to make mods fit with the newer version should be discouraged, but in saying that if they can't support a "release that they make" and much more importantly don't ask/tell the original mod maker of their intentions then it will and has lead to a whole heap of trouble.
Respect the work that has gone on b4, and with permission and continuity we may go forward.
It would be pretty darn stupid for many people to be working on the same mod update (including the originator) to find it just as your nearing completion....someone else has just released it! |
 |
|
|
Etymon
Advanced Member
United States
2385 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 19:46:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by sy
ETYMON - Just because i get run down by someone driving a ford, i blame ford? :)
Sy,
It's not that easy, though if it were, that would be nice.
Now if a Ford was a public domain automobile, and Ford held the copyright to its functionality and image yet let others modify everything but the logo and the copyright ... and then let people ... whoever wanted to add their own modifications as well as drive that autombile where ever they could.
And then if that automobile with a driver who knows the automobile was modified was to run over an innocent person because the driver could not control that automobile due to their own implementation of questionable modifications.
Begin Edit ------ ADDED for more clarity -------
If Ford were to have a public board which allowed just anyone to post homemade how-to-modify-your-Ford instructions without official rebuttal from Ford ...
End Edit ------ ADDED for more clarity -------
... Then, yes, one "COULD" have opportunity to place Ford to blame since they are the copyright holders responsible for governing their copyright in such a way that specifically states how to modify their automobile safely.
I'm not saying that the Snitz staff is acting this way. This is only to make sense of your reply.
Does this explanation sound that unreasonable?
Etymon
|
Edited by - Etymon on 18 September 2002 20:35:00 |
|
|
|
sji2671
Junior Member
United Kingdom
185 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 19:50:08
|
Clear as mud  , deviating somewhat from the original post. |
Edited by - sji2671 on 18 September 2002 19:50:46 |
|
|
|
methilnet
Starting Member
4 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 20:09:39
|
First my apologies Davio,
Second, my intention was to solve the bug reported by zoomdubai.
you can delete the topic if you want.
I have deleted the mod on Snitz Exchange. |
|
|
|
Deleted
deleted
4116 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 20:10:15
|
This problem has no (rock solid) solution until MODs are registered somehow...
If I were the copyright owner, I would seriously think of a certification schema for MODs, such as giving a unique Name, ID, version number or similar.
The reason that I didn't publish any MODs until now is that I cannot support it in any way, at least until v4 is out. So if you cannot support it, don't release it. If you want to share some work of your own (i.e. not based on somebody else's work), but don't want to support it, release it but say at the beginning of your post in red and bold "I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS"... So easy...
|
 Stop the WAR! |
|
|
|
Etymon
Advanced Member
United States
2385 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 20:14:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by sji2671
Clear as mud , deviating somewhat from the original post.
Deviating from the original post!? The 4th reply posted by a Snitz Forum Moderator began the deviation. Perhaps, you should send your remarks to him instead of taking a pot shot at someone so far down the line in the conversation!
--------
Out of nearly 19,000 members here at Snitz as of this writing less than 102 members have more than 200 posts. I think the math is evident. Few people are here for the long-run, and even fewer give back the the community consistently, whether that be financially, or with code support, or with calm critique.
What is the reason for this? It could be a lot of things. However, I don't think that making the MODs safer to use will decrease the amount of people who stick around for the long run.
On the contrary, I think it will increase the numbers.
Etymon
|
Edited by - Etymon on 18 September 2002 20:17:30 |
|
|
|
Doug G
Support Moderator
USA
6493 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 22:21:11
|
There seems to be a lack of understanding of GPL software at this site.
Also there seem to be people who like to stir up controversy these days. I don't understand why, but if it continues maybe it will be time to look for greener pastures. :)
|
======
Doug G
======
Computer history and help at www.dougscode.com |
|
|
|
Davio
Development Team Member
Jamaica
12217 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 23:02:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doug G
There seems to be a lack of understanding of GPL software at this site.
Also there seem to be people who like to stir up controversy these days. I don't understand why, but if it continues maybe it will be time to look for greener pastures. :)
Who exactly you reffering to there Doug? 
I do quite understand that users are capable of doing what they want with the mod. I don't mind them doing it at all. But it just brings confusion to users and to the mod authors when there is 5 different versions of the mod. Each have thier own bugs and some not being supported by thier authors. Users get frustrated when the mod doesn't work and they have un-install that mod to try another version of the mod to see if that works. And this just for 1 mod. Not to mention to do it all over again for another mod. That's just choas if you ask me.
If a user released a new poll mod from scratch or created a new poll mod based off of mine, that would be great. I encourage that. But to avoid confusion here, for authors and users, it would help if they let the original authors of mods know what users plan to do with thier mods in terms of upgrading it. If anything, the mod author could give that user what ever code they have, if they were working on a new version.
GPL doesn't cover what happens after you have released 10 different versions of a users mod. It just says you are allowed to do that without the author's permission. And I believe we need to find some way to bring some direction to all this. |
Support Snitz Forums
|
|
|
|
Davio
Development Team Member
Jamaica
12217 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 23:06:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by methilnet
First my apologies Davio,
Second, my intention was to solve the bug reported by zoomdubai.
you can delete the topic if you want.
I have deleted the mod on Snitz Exchange.
Methilnet, if that was all the change you made you could have easily posted the change or fix in the Poll Mod topic KB started. Users would have seen it and fixed thier bug.
I just hope this doesn't stop you from creating any more mods. |
Support Snitz Forums
|
|
|
|
pentiummx
New Member
79 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 23:11:23
|
The concerns raised in this topic highlights the hazards, limitations, and disadvantages of using GPL-based applications. Unfortunately for some of us, ASP-challenged forum admins, it's just a bit too late.
My POLL MOD shows only the result page (and not the voting page). I can't get it to go back to how it looked like before even after deleting my cookies. I've tried uninstalling (by running uninstall_poll.asp) but it instantly corrupted by register.asp (gives error message about fields no longer matching) preventing me or any of my users from logging in totally. So here I am, with a promising number of users with a POLL mod that doesn't really work of which I can't really uninstall. There goes my dream of starting up a promising web site...
Moving forward, I'd like to see an official 'snitz' site where MODs are tested for UAT (User acceptance testing) prior to release. The answer is NOT TO STOP writing MODs. The answer is to create a quality assurance methodology that does not hamper or 'kill' the spirit of GPL.
still having faith...
Armand |
|
|
|
@tomic
Senior Member
USA
1790 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 23:21:04
|
Isn't there the potential for some kind of liability if a group proclaims that a MOD is "safe" and sometime down the road something bad happens involving those MODs?
@tomic |
SportsBettingAcumen.com |
|
|
|
Deleted
deleted
4116 Posts |
Posted - 18 September 2002 : 23:30:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by pentiummx
Moving forward, I'd like to see an official 'snitz' site where MODs are tested for UAT (User acceptance testing) prior to release. The answer is NOT TO STOP writing MODs. The answer is to create a quality assurance methodology that does not hamper or 'kill' the spirit of GPL.
Do we need to re-invent the wheel everytime? There ARE methodologies in software engineering! Did anybody hear of Software Lifecycle, alpha & beta releases, versioning etc?
The whole problem can be solved by defining a preferred method for this. That's it... How to name, how to version, etc... This will not be against the nature of GPL, it will just be a guideline to help MOD writers & users, easing ther life... Snitz (including the MODs) is a groupwork of all members, some write base code, some write mods, some test, some give ideas, some just use it... And for sure, a groupwork without rules will result in chaos.
Anyway, I never understood this kind of freedom in Snitz...
|
Stop the WAR! |
|
|
|
pentiummx
New Member
79 Posts |
Posted - 19 September 2002 : 00:04:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by bozden
The whole problem can be solved by defining a preferred method for this. That's it... How to name, how to version, etc... This will not be against the nature of GPL, it will just be a guideline to help MOD writers & users, easing ther life... Snitz (including the MODs) is a groupwork of all members, some write base code, some write mods, some test, some give ideas, some just use it... And for sure, a groupwork without rules will result in chaos.
Definition of methodologies and its enforcement are two distinct entities.
You said it yourself, "...a groupwork without rules will result in chaos..." This is where enforcement comes into play. We can have all the good rules and 'best practices' in the world outlined in a nifty clickable link. But until such time that accountability is enforced, we will always find a novice coder out there who may or may not have the noble idea of helping his/her fellow technician create or manage a better Snitz forum.
The question now is what freedom would we loose when and if enforcement of (code) ethics is followed through? What model would we follow moving forward? How can we ensure that this model doesn't kill the spirit of GPL and ensure protection of the base code at its simplest/latest version? These are questions I have no answer for... Perhaps the more senior audience in this crew can give more insights to this matter. |
Edited by - pentiummx on 19 September 2002 00:04:57 |
|
|
|
favorini
Starting Member
USA
27 Posts |
Posted - 19 September 2002 : 00:06:39
|
Interesting topic. I have a few thoughts.
I am a brand new member here and one who is investigating Snitz Forums for my own site. I have also written a fair bit of ASP code. As such, I have my own ideas of some MODs I'd like to see. Of course some of these may already exist (or at least close). So I have been looking around for a list of MODs with descriptions and/or demos.
I have found the Snitz Exchange, SnitzBitz, and the list of MODs updated for 3.4. I haven't found what I was hoping to find, which is a reasonably complete list which gives a short description of each mod, and a demo link.
I think something like SnitzBitz (I will use this as an example) could be expanded just a bit to solve both my problem and the problem brought up in this thread. Here is what I'd like to see: (I realize some of these are already there.)
- Name of MOD
- Version of MOD
- Compatible Snitz versions
- Date of release
- Author
- Short Description
- Download link
- Link to Demo site(s)
- Link to MOD Homepage (or to a topic here in the MODs group)
- Rating
- Date of last author contact/update
The last three items can go a long way to showing whether a MOD is well supported (and well done). The rating is done by users and is pretty self-explanatory. The link to MOD homepage (or topic here in the MODs forum) would be the definitive place to get the latest info on the MOD (and possibly post questions, etc.). Obviously if this is out of date or missing, the MOD is not well supported. The last item is the date the author last made a change or update to the MODs entry at SnitzBitz. Note that this is different from a MOD release date. What I am trying to capture is whether the MOD author is still around and supporting his/her MOD.
This last item could be implemented in a couple of ways. It could mean the MOD author would actually visit SnitzBitz every few months or whatever and click on a link that says "I am here." Of course updating any of the info in the database would be just as good. Or perhaps after x months of no updates, the author would be emailed with a link to click that indicates they are still supporting the MOD (a la the email registration feature in the forum). This latter option is a little easier on the author.
One cute thing I have seen is a little traffic light graphic that goes with this. The light is green if record has been updated recently. Yellow if not so recent. Red if not for a long time. Lets you quickly see what is current and what isn't.
What do you think? Am I dreaming? I would be happy to help build such a list. I know I should probably just email the SnitzBitz guys, but this thread caught my eye, and I've been thinking about this for a couple of days, so here it is.
-Fran
|
|
|
|
tduffy
Junior Member
146 Posts |
Posted - 19 September 2002 : 01:01:50
|
| It boils down to this... Do not install mods that were created by people that aren't reputable. I myself am waiting for Davio's release, because thats what I used in previous versions and I know that if there is an issue, he's going to be around to answer my questions. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
