Hacker News Reader

Comment by ffreire | Hacker News Reader

I believe the argument for open source is that the community can continue to maintain the software long past when the creator stops (for whatever reason). Responsible maintainers will often seek new developers from the community to take charge (as is the case with marginalia[0], the first project that came to mind). Of course this isn't the only reason why folks want ST to be open source, but I believe this addresses your point about abandoning closed source software.

[0]: http://blog.fogus.me/2013/08/12/marginalia-has-a-new-home/

View on HN

>I believe the argument for open source is that the community can continue to maintain the software long past when the creator stops

We've seen this fail to be so in practice time and again, if not for the software entirely (which also happens), then for less popular ports, like for OS X and Windows.

Worked out for Blender. Depends on community I giess.

We've also seen it hugely succeed time and again, with software like Open Office and Blender, and the vast cottage communities set up around open sourced video game engines.

It's pretty simple: if the software is unique and offers good enough utility, people will jump on it. If it's open sourced as abandonware, it will probably remain abandonware.

Projects can still be abandoned even if they're open source, yes.

But surely the odds of a project's long-term viability [i]increase[/i] if the community has the option of continuing the project, right? Clearly, if the project is [i]not[/i] open-sourced, then its odds of outliving its original author's interest are obviously stuck at 0%.

> But surely the odds of a project's long-term viability increase if the community has the option of continuing the project, right?

I agree with this, but not the following:

> Clearly, if the project is not open-sourced, then its odds of outliving its original author's interest are obviously stuck at 0%.

Because, while the author's interest flagging doesn't necessarily mean a closed-source project is dead, the author could transfer it (open-sourcing could be considered an example, but it could also be sold when they tire of it.)

But with closed source, there is a risk that a time will come, either through neglect or active decision, where development will stop and others will be legally denied the right to take up the maintenance of the system, whereas with open source, the right of interested outside parties to take over is, insofar as this is possible, guaranteed.

markdown uses words wrapped in single asterisks for italics. You're using bbcode.

    *this will be italics*

produces:

this will be italics

Hacker News does not support markdown. It supports just italics with asterisks, blank lines for paragraphs, code blocks by indenting with two spaces (while markdown uses 4), and auto-linking URLs. https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc

Well. textmate was also closed source, abandoned and opensoured... Didn't do any good. I'm very happy with ST and hope other people will also buy a license.

Sure about that? https://github.com/textmate/textmate/commits/master

Happy TextMate 2 user here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com