Google Offers Bounties for Finding Chrome Bugs

[Rob Williams]

As I have mentioned many times in our news section in the past, I'm a big fan of open-sourced software and use it where able. Because I use Linux as my primary operating system, most of the software I use is free and open-sourced, but even for Windows, a lot of what I use there is as well. There are many reasons I like open-sourced software, but if I had to choose just one, it's that I simply like the "open" nature of software.

​

You can read the rest of our news post here.

 

[2Tired2Tango]

here.

Interesting blurb and not a bad idea....

Although I would offer counterpoint to the "Open Source" concept by pointing out that "branches" are often problematic as they lead to a proliferation of "nearly alike" copies of the software that each seem to carry their own set of issues. I think I see this from the old saw of "Too many cooks spoil the broth"... and I've seen several very good projects go that way over the years. One example was the old Mozilla browser which was just a disaster of bugs, confising features and poor support until Netscape picked it up and cleaned up the code.

I don't actually dislike Open Source... but for my own projects I tend to work with "Open Protocal" where I will release communications information, disk file formats etc, but keep the software internals under wraps. I find this works wonderfully as some of the suggestions I get are beyond helpful and often find their way into my next generation of code.

Good for Google... Good idea, lets hope Chrome gets better for it.

 

[Rob Williams]

I don't actually dislike Open Source... but for my own projects I tend to work with "Open Protocal" where I will release communications information, disk file formats etc, but keep the software internals under wraps.

I can understand that way of doing things completely, especially if you don't particularly <em>want</em> other people to just take the code and re-brand it. It allows you to keep the base as you like it, but allow them to do whatever else they want with it. There are a lot of projects out there that do something similar.

I agree about the software forks as well. Most of the time, they die off rather fast... I can't personally think of a software fork that's successful today, although I'm sure there are some. I'm not sure about in Windows, but in the Linux world, forks/branches seem to be fairly common.

 

[2Tired2Tango]

I agree about the software forks as well. Most of the time, they die off rather fast... I can't personally think of a software fork that's successful today, although I'm sure there are some. I'm not sure about in Windows, but in the Linux world, forks/branches seem to be fairly common.

Media Player Classic Home Cinema started out as a fork from Gabest's original MPC project... They are code-alike to the point where both share common bugs. But the Home Cinema version won out because that crew compiled all the codecs into the executable making for a much simpler installation. It's actually a case where the fork killed the original project... which is also not good.

 

[Tharic-Nar]

Pidgin is a fork of GAIM, and left gaim behind, can't even remember why they split.

 

[2Tired2Tango]

Pidgin is a fork of GAIM, and left gaim behind, can't even remember why they split.

I don't know in this particular case... but offten the "fork" comes from the two devolpers getting into a "fork you" kind of disagreement....

Really it's as often personality as progress.

 

[2Tired2Tango]

I can understand that way of doing things completely, especially if you don't particularly <em>want</em> other people to just take the code and re-brand it. It allows you to keep the base as you like it, but allow them to do whatever else they want with it. There are a lot of projects out there that do something similar.

I agree about the software forks as well. Most of the time, they die off rather fast... I can't personally think of a software fork that's successful today, although I'm sure there are some. I'm not sure about in Windows, but in the Linux world, forks/branches seem to be fairly common.

Well, if we take my Remote Media project as an example... (and I'm betting you knew I would )...

I'm putting something like 80% of my effort into getting the LAN based remote control server running smooth as silk. The other bits --the remote control itself and the share browser-- are mostly example apps to show what can be done. Once it's in late Beta and I am confident it's going to work as expected, I will release the communications sequences and encourage other developers to begin their own projects... In particular I would like to see PDA, Smartphone and Blackberry versions of the Browser and Remote Control... This I view as an essential step in the success of the project.

Of course throughout this I will continue devloping the server, incorporating suggestions and ideas as I deem appropriate. Odd as it may seem, I actually like it when people complain (in a constructive way) about my software... it helps me make it better.

BUT... nobody will ever see my source code.
It was my idea. I wrote it. I own it. It's mine. So there

 

[Kougar]

Pidgin is a fork of GAIM, and left gaim behind, can't even remember why they split.

As I recall it wasn't a fork, but a major re-launch of the original GAIM code by the original dev team. This was because of AOL's legal battle over trademarks against "GAIM", which was settled by completely renaming the program and files to Pidgin.

 

[Tharic-Nar]

As I recall it wasn't a fork, but a major re-launch of the original GAIM code by the original dev team. This was because of AOL's legal battle over trademarks against "GAIM", which was settled by completely renaming the program and files to Pidgin.

Yup, your right, think i got some wires crossed reading up on it a couple years back with regard to some speculation over the name change or something. Forum posts and announcements sometimes blend together.... my mistake.