Completely agree Neil - developing in the open would solve a lot of these issues, but there are some who would rather take from the open source community (and the long line of people who have made it what it is today) and not contribute to or be open and transparent. This openness and transparency is what we at XDA encourage and require.
You are correct in that all of this finger-pointing doesn't belong here. It's been discussed ad nauseam and always seems to initiate from outside XDA (ChadGoodman was removed from XDA officially and his private site is where things are orchestrated). As I have mentioned before, if someone has real issues (and not "dev wars") with something that is posted on XDA there are clear pathways *on XDA* for bringing them to our attention and they will be investigated. There doesn't really seem to be a need to have a specific XDA sub-list. ---- Jeremy Meiss OEM Relations, Developer Committee, Senior Moderator XDA-Developers <http://www.xda-developers.com> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Neil Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > Quoting Eric D <[email protected]>: > > people from this list say they dont really care (in not so many words) >> > > The XDA-related traffic to the list is unusual, both in terms of content > and volume, and I think this is at least part of the reason why it is > provoking that sort of reaction. > > Each new "debate" seems more a rivalry between factions in a relatively > small community than something needing legal consideration, and, in my > view, publication of full source code would only help matters: > > - better traceability of modifications to minimise misappropriation > ("kanging"?) and more easily resolve disputes over authorship > - less time wasted on fighting about compliance, getting websites taken > down / put back, vetting who can see what and so on, and more time on > developing; and > - better ROMs for everyone. > > My second suggestion would be a sub-list for XDA-related traffic, so that > those who do not wish to receive this rather unusual correspondence need > not, but can remain subscribed to the main list? I am still unsure - not > that it is any say of mine - that gpl-violations.org is the right home > for this traffic, rather than xda-developers.com, but, if it is to remain > on gpl-violations.org, I would perhaps house it differently. > > > Best wishes, > > Neil > > > -- > > > Neil Brown > > [email protected] | http://neilzone.co.uk > > >
