Re: [Ldsoss] helping the Church by developing. was : MLS Bugs and Discussions
> My current project is one to scan paper docs and index the docs for quick > retrieval. Building it has been fun but very challenging. After a few hundred > hours coding and many hundreds of hours researching how the various > interfaces work things are finally starting to work. I still have a long way > to go and much to learn. The project is now in use and starting to help a > friend with a paper problem. We are working on version 0.4.0. Hopefully 0.4.0 > will be ready to release in the next few weeks. PHP, SQL, WWW and others are > (finally) becoming friends. Next is learning to tame CVS, > rpm/apt/emerge/make, a project editor and version 0.4.1 ! Then on to 0.4.2 . > It has been great fun. Learning subversion (or svn for short) may have a bigger payoff than "tam[ing] CVS." At least, it did for my company :) ___ Ldsoss mailing list Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
Re: [Ldsoss] Re: MLS Bugs and Discussions
On 1/15/06, Shane Hathaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nathan wrote: > > Just out of curiosity, is there a concious reason why the church > > restricts access to the program and it's source, or is that just a > > historical byproduct? I mean, it's obvious that the church can't give > > access to the data these programs use since the data iteself is > > confidential, but what does it have to gain by restricting access to > > the program itself? It seems like the church would naturally be a big > > open-source proponent, as it's not selling its software (as far as I > > know) anyway. > > I think the Church needs to be absolutely sure the membership data is > used the way it was intended to be used. If the source were accessible, > well-meaning but misguided clerks could more easily make mistakes and > leak personal information about members. If the leak were discovered, > people might stop trusting the Church with their personal information, > and might even sue the Church, reducing the Church's ability to fulfill > its mission to perfect the saints. Thus any software that has access to > private membership information is probably not a good candidate to > release as open source software. > > However, the Church currently seems optimistic about open source > software for most other work. Unfortunately, lots of Church software is > already tied to proprietary agreements. In practice, building software > to be released as open source software requires a committment to open > source right from the start of the project. > > Shane Good reasoning. That makes sense. ~ Nathan ___ Ldsoss mailing list Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
Re: [Ldsoss] Emergency Preparedness Software
On 1/12/06, Oscar Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: through the 40's, 50's and into today. Ham traffic can not be secured toencrypt the data as required by some of the new privacy laws. As I read theregs I can not see any legal way to pass traffic which may reveal information about the heath or status of anyone especially a minor. Also if a cell phoneI am no ham radio expert, but I have seen ads for digital ham radio setups that can transfer whatever data you want. If you can transfer whatever data you want, then you can use PKI and/or diffie/helman to transfer data securely. Carl ___ Ldsoss mailing list Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
Re: [Ldsoss] Re: MLS Bugs and Discussions
Nathan wrote: Just out of curiosity, is there a concious reason why the church restricts access to the program and it's source, or is that just a historical byproduct? I mean, it's obvious that the church can't give access to the data these programs use since the data iteself is confidential, but what does it have to gain by restricting access to the program itself? It seems like the church would naturally be a big open-source proponent, as it's not selling its software (as far as I know) anyway. I think the Church needs to be absolutely sure the membership data is used the way it was intended to be used. If the source were accessible, well-meaning but misguided clerks could more easily make mistakes and leak personal information about members. If the leak were discovered, people might stop trusting the Church with their personal information, and might even sue the Church, reducing the Church's ability to fulfill its mission to perfect the saints. Thus any software that has access to private membership information is probably not a good candidate to release as open source software. However, the Church currently seems optimistic about open source software for most other work. Unfortunately, lots of Church software is already tied to proprietary agreements. In practice, building software to be released as open source software requires a committment to open source right from the start of the project. Shane ___ Ldsoss mailing list Ldsoss@lists.ldsoss.org http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
