OT meta discussion : vcv

#1

Totally agree, and by the way, as you're capable of reading and programming the code they used, would it be a large task to rip-out the NWO part and fork the project to another site?

As long as people rectify these NWO-style practices, eventually, open source developers will learn that if you abuse your position of developer, your project will be taken from you and forked. So I do agree with you 100%. I've noticed this is a problem that is starting to spread throughout the open source community like wild fire, but thankfully there is a guaranteed way to cure it:

Simply remind the developer that such practices are not in the spirit of open source, and that if the requirement is not removed, a fork of the project can be arranged. Things like this happen all the time, open source projects often get forked because some in the project don't agree with what others are doing.

That said, I don't want to come across as a moaner, and it does look pretty damn awesome, a great project, but I do hope they quit the NWO-style bullshit. As it's open source, people should be able to download any additions they wish, from wherever they wish, and should not need to register to do so.

Simple as that.

Virtual eurorack modular synthesizer vcv
Virtual eurorack modular synthesizer vcv
Virtual eurorack modular synthesizer vcv
#2
#3

Please not forget this:

Someone put quite some time in doing this. I suspect this is not a hobby project. They want to eventually make some money from it by offering paid modules. And that's totally fine. In the end, they wouldn't develop the project as far as they did if it was non-commercial only.
On the other hand, there is a convenience factor in the way the installation of new modules works. Don't underestimate how important this is for the average user.

The bottom line is: You get the hard work and effort from someone who puts a lot of time into the project (and needs money to do so) combined with the momentum of what seems to be a quickly growing user base. On the other hand, everything you don't want can always be stripped off, because its open source. How great is that?

Really, I'm with you on all the points you made. But we should not forget that a slight commercial touch can be an important motor for a project. Even if eventually parts of the final software are closed source and paid, the whole framework will still be open and the API and format will spread due to the availability of good-quality, polished (paid) modules. I see this as a win situation even for the most hardcore open source fundamentalist.

edit: aahh, topic was split while I typed my answer. @thetechnobear can you move this? thanks!

#4

I realise that commercial reasons help out, and that is likely the reason. Nevertheless, strum pointed out that you need to register in order to use the free stuff.

That's the only problem I have with it, I don't have any problem with them wanting to earn from it, because the more people can earn a living from open source, the faster proprietory will go the way of the Dodo.

I don't know why Mark even split the thread, it just hides what people were correctly pointing out. I do miss his friendly Miniature Polar Bear avatar when he's not around, but man does he like that split button :smile:

#5

I just noticed a further post from strum, he already mentioned removing the login stuff.
GO STRUM!!!

#6

Self-moderated post :sunglasses:

#7

a bit of clarification... if we split a topic and mark unlisted.. this is not a place to continue to that discussion - if we moderate to say we don't want it to continue, that is the end of it.

#8

Self-moderated post :sunglasses:

#9