There's a difference between sending out an open source library and an open source APPLICATION, which requires a key be used for identification and source.
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 08:48, Andrew Badera <and...@badera.us> wrote: > > Yes, but don't distribute it. Obviously config files are human > readable, but you blank out secrets before publishing them. > > People using open source libraries will have to get their own keys. > So, either you really are contributing in the spirit of open source, > and you don't care about getting credit, or you're doing it for self > promotional purposes, and the conversation is moot anyhow. > > "You" being any person worried about keys and open sourcing their > libraries. > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Cameron Kaiser<spec...@floodgap.com> > wrote: > > > >> The secret should not reside in code. The secret should reside in a > >> config file, or maybe even a machine datastore. Abstract it out, no > >> one ever needs to see anything secret in your code. > > > > That's not workable. It has to be publicly accessible somehow. > > > > -- > > ------------------------------------ personal: > http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ -- > > Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * > ckai...@floodgap.com > > -- He hadn't a single redeeming vice. -- Oscar Wilde > -------------------------- > > > -- Internets. Serious business.
