Re: [tw] @Osmosoft ethical brigades

2010-10-19 Thread Jeremy Ruston
 I must test out a few plugins created by others. I want to test them
 separately, i.e on default spaces, and include them if they fulfill my
 needs.

I have a scratch space that I use for sandboxing experiments and
playing with unfamiliar plugins.

 Is it OK to simply create a space with an established plugin name and
 put up that plugin there? The question is probably more about the name
 napping aspect than the right to (re-)publish it. I understand it is
 legally OK but with the creation of tiddlyspace we're on unchartered
 waters regarding best practice, what will maximize the benefit of the
 community and TW etc.

The best way to publish plugins on TiddlySpace is currently to publish
two spaces, one with the plugins that need to be included and one that
acts as a demo space. For example:

http://myplugin.tiddlyspace.com/ - Space containing the plugin and any
required subsidiary tiddlers
http://myplugindemo.tiddlyspace.com/ - An example space that shows off
the plugin

In the simple cases people would publish their own plugins. However
when the author isn't available it seems reasonable for the community
to publish the plugins on their behalf (subject to the original
license conditions, of course). I guess many people in that situation
will worry that they end up being the private owners of something that
might be better treated as a community asset.

A few ideas that spring to mind:

* To avoid the situation where somebody inadvertantly namesquats an
important plugin name, we could introduce, say, tiddlyspace as a
special username that people can add as a member of their spaces to
indicate that the space is intended to be a shared social asset. We
could then have an offline process for curator members of the
community to request membership of particular spaces

* A specialist group like Osmosoft could formally adopt orphan plugins
and publish and maintain them on behalf of the community


 It is also an issue because a plugin (or any code), published for
 inclusion on tiddlyspace - but not by the creator -  will eventually
 get outdated and tiddlyspace users will continue to use it. And if the
 original author is not the space creator then he may not be able to
 update it even if he wants to. I know of at least one prominent plugin
 author who earlier has expressed annoyance when people copy plugins
 from other sources than the original only to get an outdated one and
 then complain about it. This phenomenon is likely to increase on
 tiddlyspace if not dealt with.

Ironically, of course, TiddlySpace is designed to make it easier to
keep things up to date.

I'm interested in making it possible for externally hosted static
TiddlyWiki files to participate on TiddlySpace, by setting up some
sort of proxy/alias space. So for example, jeremy.tiddlyspace.com
might be equivalent to content stored in a static TiddlyWiki at
http://jeremystiddlywiki.com/

 Maybe this will be solved with some kind of webcrawling thingy,
 locating and converting existing remode plugins to tiddlyspace ones
 (and either update existing ones or creating a new space for it) but
 for now I see problems looming.

 Maybe an intermediate solution like including the original author as a
 member will suffice? (But one must know his tspace name... Maybe
 backstage could list at least the more prominent coders names?) Or
 maybe a clause stating that creators have a right to contact Osmosoft
 and gain access to code that is exclusively written by them (i.e
 single plugin spaces) and using their established plugin name?

 (To some extent I guess this is also a call for creators to publish
 their used-by-others-stuff on tiddlyspace.)

Best wishes

Jeremy


 Thank you.



 --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
 TiddlyWiki group.
 To post to this group, send email to tiddlyw...@googlegroups.com.
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
 tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 For more options, visit this group at 
 http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.





-- 
Jeremy Ruston
mailto:jer...@osmosoft.com
http://www.tiddlywiki.com

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
TiddlyWiki group.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlyw...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.



[tw] @Osmosoft ethical brigades

2010-10-18 Thread twgrp
I must test out a few plugins created by others. I want to test them
separately, i.e on default spaces, and include them if they fulfill my
needs.

Is it OK to simply create a space with an established plugin name and
put up that plugin there? The question is probably more about the name
napping aspect than the right to (re-)publish it. I understand it is
legally OK but with the creation of tiddlyspace we're on unchartered
waters regarding best practice, what will maximize the benefit of the
community and TW etc.

It is also an issue because a plugin (or any code), published for
inclusion on tiddlyspace - but not by the creator -  will eventually
get outdated and tiddlyspace users will continue to use it. And if the
original author is not the space creator then he may not be able to
update it even if he wants to. I know of at least one prominent plugin
author who earlier has expressed annoyance when people copy plugins
from other sources than the original only to get an outdated one and
then complain about it. This phenomenon is likely to increase on
tiddlyspace if not dealt with.

Maybe this will be solved with some kind of webcrawling thingy,
locating and converting existing remode plugins to tiddlyspace ones
(and either update existing ones or creating a new space for it) but
for now I see problems looming.

Maybe an intermediate solution like including the original author as a
member will suffice? (But one must know his tspace name... Maybe
backstage could list at least the more prominent coders names?) Or
maybe a clause stating that creators have a right to contact Osmosoft
and gain access to code that is exclusively written by them (i.e
single plugin spaces) and using their established plugin name?

(To some extent I guess this is also a call for creators to publish
their used-by-others-stuff on tiddlyspace.)

Thank you.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
TiddlyWiki group.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlyw...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.