It is perfectly acceptible to release RevTalk code under the terms of the GPL, MIT or other licenses. This has been done before, and debated extensively over the years in other related platforms - even where the engine itself is closed.
Purists, like to argue over the issue, and debates can get heated (and usually tedious). My personal point of view is that there is precedence here and a number of thriving communities have grown up by using open source and open content licenses in similar circumstances. As that is the purpose, I'll go with what works and is helpful with regard to community building, and stick to arguing the philosophy down the pub (which is a much more enjoyable place for those sort of debates). Building a practical and truely collaborative open source community around RevTalk is certainly helped if the "mothership" takes a clear and encouraging stance on these issues. I have long argued on this list and elsewhere that RunRev should adopt an explicit "open source strategy" to encourage proper collaboration between developers on a clear and firm legal basis. This does not mean open sourcing their engine, but it does mean taking the small steps needed to support and encourage community efforts in this area. Releasing the documentation under an open content (Creative Commons) license would be symbolic and help. Explicitly releasing the code in the IDE under an MIT or other open source license, and encouraging integration with other similarly licensed IDEs (like MC IDE) would also help. As far as I can gather from talking to Kevin, Mark and the other folks at RunRev - they have nothing against these moves which I found encouraging. As far as I can tell it is simply that none of the developers there have experience of working on open source projects, and the use of open licenses, and as such they are not quite sure as to how they would support / engage with such and effort given their limited resources. I proposed to Kevin and a number of developers at RunRev Live, that maybe we can move this area forwards by creating a community led project with an explicit remit to develop open source code libraries and widgets in RevTalk. This would be an arms length legal entity, with RunRev or any other interested party able to join as a full member and have a say with regard to the projects direction. Based on the positive feedback to these ideas from the conference, I've decided to put what time I have into taking this forwards with the aim of launching it in time for the RunRev November launch. The organisation would be not-for-profit, in that any money derived from activities such as commercial closed source dual licensing of code libraries would go back into the pool to pay developers to work on open source libraries. I've discussed this proposal with a number of funders here in the UK and it seems encouraging to apply for some grants to develop this community as well. Any individual developer or company is fully entitled to join, and the organisation will have an open membership. The aim is simple to define collectively what tools and resources the community would like to develop as open source code and resource these efforts. The secondary aim is to engage with other open source and open content communities, building on the strengths and accessibility of the language to be immediately understandable to any programmer, and encourage interoperability between RevTalk and other open source frameworks. My personal interest in the project is in the legal and community side, and I want to combine this with my passion for RevTalk to pilot a truly innovative collaborative community, not just based around code, but also open media content as well. While the Revolution engine is not open, the accessibility of the language, the free version of the IDE in RevMedia, and it's ability to appeal to designers and non-developers interested in media, place it in a strong position to serve as a foundation for a rich "open content" community. I'm hopeful that other developers will share these goals, and that we can work together to support the wider adoption of the language and the creation of higher quality open code and media resources for the community. If there is anyone who would like to discuss the funding proposals, or join either as a full legal partner, or as an informal associate partner maybe we can start a discussion off list? From previous experience I'd say that this list is best kept to discussions regarding code, and the use of Revolution - I'm breaking this rule here just as a heads-up and invitation to those interested in this area to help co-design this initiative :) _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution