Subject Re: [IBDI] Source under NDA
Author Helen Borrie
At 04:28 PM 12-03-00 -0500, you wrote:
>From: Ann Harrison <harrison@...>
> >Why can't the Source code be released under a tempory NDA to build up the
> >knowledge base for when the source comes out for real?
>That's and interesting thought and one I'd like to pass back
>to the community. Here are the things that need to be done
>before the code is released, officially.
> References to licensing must be removed.
> Conditional code for obsolete ports, etc. must be removed.
> The build procedures must be fixed so it will build on
> systems other than the ones in Scotts Valley.
>Only the last one will take any significant amount of time.
>Would there be value to a "private release" before the build
>procedures were fixed?
Yes: I see several benefits -
1. the one Dan mentioned, of giving coders a preview of things like coding
standards, etc.
2. IMMENSE one of convincing people that Inprise isn't stalling with some
sinister intent to renege on the open-sourcing
3. lets people (e.g. Kylix beta developers, et al.) in on what are going
to be the issues when coding tools for IB on the various platforms
4. those interested in open source who have given up and gone away will
come back before it's too late
5. open source developers have a basis on which to organise themselves

1. It will have to be pretty private until the infrastructure for open
source development is in place, otherwise IB6 could start life with umpteen
out-of-control forks
2. There has to be SOME way to make it absolutely clear that it's in
preview mode and is NOT open yet. As far as the general open source
community is concerned, it has to be known to be still Black Box until the
source is officially opened for development

I expect there are other code control/checkout facilities and
access to the tools for that.

"Words lead to deeds: they prepare the soul, make it ready,
and move it to tenderness." - St Teresa