On 03/03/2016 12:41 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > On Thursday, March 03, 2016 11:44:43 AM Lee Howard wrote: > >> How many is "many"? > It was discussed in the past on list by several, and some other put it on > Wikipdia. How much do you need?
I'm merely pointing out that you're using the word "many" when you know a definite number. Instead of stating that number (is it four? five?) you've chosen to interpret that number as representative of a larger group and said "many". It's called hyperbole. If you inject hyperbole into a discussion then it makes your position weak. > > How many are still part of the community posting to the mailing list at times? > Even if not needing anything, could be helping others with questions. Yes, and they could also use the mailing list forum to criticize the project, too. > How many are committing code? Does the number of committers equate to the number of coders and equate to the number of contributors? For my software projects I routinely get contributions in various forms, some code, some not, but I am making virtually all of the commits, myself. > >> Did John ask you to speak for him on this matter? What makes you think >> that John would have done what you want? > By looking at some of this other stuff like wob. I don't think it's so-easily concluded. I work on both monolithic and and non-monolithic software. Just because I do one doesn't mean that I don't also do another. >> While the >> code may very-well be public domain or "free", that does not mean that >> everyone has equal-access to that code used by everyone else. > Oh yes they do.... If a project doesn't grant commit access, its called > forking... So? Just because you fork does not mean that I have to use your version of the software. > Do not mislead yourself that the code belongs to anyone. Mine belongs to me. Yours belongs to you. You do with yours what you want. If you want to share yours, then do so. In this case you're complaining about the way in which one person is sharing theirs. You don't have authority over their copy unless they allow it. > Most times forks > are not good. .... > > I rather the project not fork. I much rather keep communities > together than fracture them. While I would agree that forking does create some fracturing I am not sure how that is necessarily a bad thing. I've closely witnessed several bona-fide forks. I even have initiated a fork or two, myself. I can't think of any instance where the end-result was not better for everyone eventually. You've suggested that you would rewrite ASSP in some other language. Great! Do it, then. Some possible outcomes are: 1) You end up with your own ASSP-like software doing exactly what you want, and you share it with the world, but few others use it apparently because they're happy with what they are doing otherwise. Everyone wins. 2) Your ASSP-like software rules and everyone switches to it. Everyone wins. 3) Your ASSP-like software gains a good following, and ASSP retains a good following. Everyone wins. I'm failing to see the downsides. You seem to think that there are finite resources and that everyone's interests competes with the interests of everyone else. I don't see it that way. > No it never led to a fork, but I think it might be why Fritz ceased working on > ASSP. It wasn't a good thing. If you were around in those days you will recall > such. Hrm. Were *you* around in those days? Because if you were I would think that you would know about Fritz. > > Branches and forking in the git world have the intention of being merged back > with upstream. I suppose that depends upon the intentions of the person who created the branch, though. Sometimes the developer just wants a sandbox that they can play in while experimenting for a while... without disturbing others but while allowing others to observe or participate. > Forking a project and splintering/fracturing the community > NEVER is a good thing. Absolutely never... except for sometimes when it is... which is apparently somewhat frequent. > > I wonder if ASSP did die, how long you would keep that code around, and what > you would do with it. Firstly, ASSP doesn't *die* as long as someone is using it somewhere. But, I presume that you refer to "death" as if it stopped being developed and shared openly as it has been... Conceivably I could use it for years... even indefinitely. If I needed some fixes or enhancements I would either do them, myself, hire someone else to do them for me, or I would find an alternative solution. In the past I have done all of the above with other open-source software that was either discontinued or where the original developers ceased working on it. Anyway... I have other things that I need to do. I see that you and I are not going to reach an agreement of understanding on this. So, I'll leave it be. Thanks, Lee. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Assp-user mailing list Assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
