I agree with this.
Most bug fixes are a simple matter of a 1 or 2 line code change. I have no
problem with _giving_ this to Macromedia.
The problem with using the Developer's exchange is that it doesn't provide
much scope for descriptions of complex applications. There is no way to
know how good or bad the code is until you download and try it, and there
is no facility for distributing or managing the distribution of updates of
changes to the users other than hoping that they have checked the notify me
box when they downloaded the tool. Since they don't know how good or bad
the tool is before they download, it is unlikely that many people check
this box by default.
There should (IMHO) only be 1 version of Spectra which is sold by
Macromedia, but that needn't preclude the centralization of many Spectra
add-on products such as Alternative Webtop/admin interfaces, Custom
Security, Custom Database Structures etc. Most people who have built
multiple Spectra projects have made one or more of these modifications and
have a toolbox which they would probably be prepared to share with the
community for a price. Most would not, however be prepared to give
ownership of those tools to Macromedia for free. I would like to see a
centralized repository of mods, additions and so-on as well as the bug
fixes. This could also include a facility for posting peer review comments
on the code and a choice of licensing for the developers similar to the one
in the developer's exchange.
Without the facility to centralize these resources the onus is on the
developers to make these available to the community and development
companies do not have the resources or the inclination to create a site to
do this as they would have to invest in the hardware, marketing,
advertising etc. With a centralized resource this cost is greatly reduced
and the community is better able to benefit from the tools and use Spectra
to it's full potential.
Spike
At 16:26 13/07/2001 Friday, you wrote:
>Personally, I don't mind that minor fixes become the property of Macromedia.
>This is the way things were until now. However, I would think it wise if
>Macromedia would have a more appealing approach around major mods. Let's
>face it, the Spectra development process is now in the hands of the
>community. It'll take up to two years for stuff to appear in the CF engine.
>All those wonderful mods people might share with the world are now going to
>stay hidden. That's a shame, particularly because a lot of Spectra could
>benefit from some major changes (security, metadata for example).
>
>Not allowing forks is in my mind a bad idea. That's saying: it's perfect the
>way it is with some minor issues. That's not the case in my opinion.
>
>Kind regards,
>
>Marc Schipperheyn
><theFactor.e>
>
>Premium Partner for Macromedia
>
>The future is technological, but it will not be a world of gray steel
>
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/spectra_talk or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
