> As for the compiler, we don't have anything to announce at this time and > I am not sure if we want to do this, but I'd be interested in practical > suggestions from this list. Why should we do this? How would you use it? > How important is it--not just to be open source for the sake of it, but > actually for getting your work--whatever that is--accomplished? There > are many licenses and approaches folks take, which ones do you think > would make sense here?
To turn the question around, why wouldn't you? Since you already have decided to give it away for free -- a decision I highly appreciate, btw -- you apparently have decided to go for a high number of developers and on the production side make the money with Flexbuilder and Flash as a tool for designers. The only reason I can think of why you wouldn't want to make it open source is to keep the option to go back to selling the compiler in the future, which I think is unlikely because it would slow adaption of that future version. Alternative IDEs to compete with Flexbuilder could use the free (as in beer) SDK already, and wouldn't rely on it being open source. An open source version of the SDK could more easily be distributed with some purist Linux distros (but of course those wouldn't have the Flashplayer pre-installed, so that argument admittedly is moot). Then there is the standard argument that bugs would get fixed faster and improvements could get submitted, but I trust you to have done a good job with it. What I see as the most important argument is that for many, open source for the sake of it is important. When you target a larger group of developers, odds are more are capable of writing a compiler themselves, and sooner or later somebody will. If Adobe satisfies this demand with its original compiler, it can ensure standard compliance of SWFs produced by that segment. That's why I would propose some sort of a standards body to reign over the main branch. Set one up, call it Flex Foundation, and make big headlines. (Sorry, I can't help mentioning that the same argument can be made for the Player as well, but know it would have an effect for revenue out of licenses for the embedded market.) Anyway, I'm pleasantly surprised you're even willing to take the time to open that discussion. But then, you already mentioned you liked surprises :) Thanks! mark On 2/1/06, David Mendels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I can say that the source code for the framework will be published. (Not > necessarily under an open source license, but published so that folks > can see it and understand it and extend it.) > > As for the compiler, we don't have anything to announce at this time and > I am not sure if we want to do this, but I'd be interested in practical > suggestions from this list. Why should we do this? How would you use it? > How important is it--not just to be open source for the sake of it, but > actually for getting your work--whatever that is--accomplished? There > are many licenses and approaches folks take, which ones do you think > would make sense here? > > > -David > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nicolas Cannasse > > Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 3:27 AM > > To: Open Source Flash Mailing List > > Subject: Re: [osflash] Free compiler (was FW: [Fwd: Re: MTASC Future]) > > > > David Mendels wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > A few months ago, Claus wrote on this list: "unless macromedia > > > releases their compiler for free (unlikely)" > > > > Hi David, > > > > I would prefer "free as in freedom" than "free as is beer", > > but that's already something good ;) If you don't seel it > > anymore, it there any point in keeping the compiler sources > > closed ? People might like to study, improve, and customize > > it for specific needs. Of course this would reveal the > > bytecode format of the 8.5 Player, but some people are > > already working on that issue. > > > > Best, > > Nicolas > > > > _______________________________________________ > > osflash mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > osflash mailing list > [email protected] > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org > -- http://snafoo.org/ jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
