I have this paper that I have as a requirement and thought it would be a good idea to ask here due to the nature of GZdoom's development.
P.S. This is mostly coming from the assumption that ZDoom and all the forks after it are considered open-sourced. If I'm wrong, please correct me immediately.
What are some of the differences that come with open-source development compared to more "proprietary software"? Specific examples would be great.
For anyone using open source software extensively, what are some of the pitfalls compared to more proprietary software? (Documentation? Security? Finding help?)
Are there any examples of failed open-source projects that you would consider "notable" or "aesops of development"?
Bonus 1: Is GZDoom considered a "notable open-source project" to you?
Bonus 2: To anyone who has used Subversion, Git and Mercurial, which one do you prefer, which is your second choice, and why?
EDIT: Holy crap, thanks Rachel!
Questions about open source development
-
insightguy
- Posts: 1730
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:54 pm
Questions about open source development
Last edited by insightguy on Thu Dec 14, 2017 5:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Questions about open source development
What are some of the differences that come with open-source development compared to more "proprietary software"? Specific examples would be great.
Open source software essentially gives control into the hands of the end-user. In fact, ironically enough GZDoom follows this basic philosophy, despite being heavily modifiable with custom created content; what a lot of people don't realize is it's the person PLAYING the mod that FOSS is geared towards, more than the one creating the mod.
"Where is this control?" you might ask - well, you can enable cheats fully at any time, even in modes that normally have it locked - i.e. multiplayer and nightmare. You are able to customize the game to the maximum extent that GZDoom allows you to, and GZDoom is careful to give you the options you need for it.
And if that is not enough, having the source allows you to directly manipulate any aspect of it that you see fit or desire to change. All it takes is enough coding experience and desire to learn and experiment.
For anyone using open source software extensively, what are some of the pitfalls compared to more proprietary software? (Documentation? Security? Finding help?)
Certainly not security, because security through obscurity is a proven failed security model. Ironically you will find that developers of proprietary software have a lot less motivation to worry about security than developers of FOSS software do. The latter have a reputation to protect, the former only care about their paycheck.
Documentation, to some extent is a weakness, as is finding help. I think the biggest pitfall is, though, that there's a lack of backward financial motivation to work on such projects. You're essentially pouring your emotion and heart into it, but you don't get compensated for it, especially when you share it with others. This applies to some, more than others - for example, Graf, Randi, and dpJudas have all poured way more into this project than the rest of the development team combined. And counting the Zandronum fork, the same applies to the 3 plus Torr Samaho. And they get absolutely nothing for it.
Are there any examples of failed open-source projects that you would consider "notable" or "aesops of development"?
ZDoomGL - it had a multiple points of failure, however, that ultimately led to its demise - one being that the project was hugely ambitious for its own goals, and eventually simply crushed itself under its own weight. The author simply couldn't work on it anymore, leaving ZDoom without a GL port until Graf pulled some code in from PrBoom+ about 13-14 years ago to create GZDoom.
Bonus 1: Is GZDoom considered a "notable open-source project" to you?
Yes. It's certainly no Linux - nor anywhere near as popular. But it's a project that's near and dear to the hearts of every person who's deeply involved in it. And plus, the creative projects that are spawned from it are in fact even nowadays used in FOSS operating system distributions (for example: Wolfenstein BOA was recently inducted into Ubuntu's SNAP repository).
Bonus 2: To anyone who has used Subversion, Git and Mercurial, which one do you prefer, which is your second choice, and why?
Git 100% of the way. It's what I use and I don't really want to learn the others.
Open source software essentially gives control into the hands of the end-user. In fact, ironically enough GZDoom follows this basic philosophy, despite being heavily modifiable with custom created content; what a lot of people don't realize is it's the person PLAYING the mod that FOSS is geared towards, more than the one creating the mod.
"Where is this control?" you might ask - well, you can enable cheats fully at any time, even in modes that normally have it locked - i.e. multiplayer and nightmare. You are able to customize the game to the maximum extent that GZDoom allows you to, and GZDoom is careful to give you the options you need for it.
And if that is not enough, having the source allows you to directly manipulate any aspect of it that you see fit or desire to change. All it takes is enough coding experience and desire to learn and experiment.
For anyone using open source software extensively, what are some of the pitfalls compared to more proprietary software? (Documentation? Security? Finding help?)
Certainly not security, because security through obscurity is a proven failed security model. Ironically you will find that developers of proprietary software have a lot less motivation to worry about security than developers of FOSS software do. The latter have a reputation to protect, the former only care about their paycheck.
Documentation, to some extent is a weakness, as is finding help. I think the biggest pitfall is, though, that there's a lack of backward financial motivation to work on such projects. You're essentially pouring your emotion and heart into it, but you don't get compensated for it, especially when you share it with others. This applies to some, more than others - for example, Graf, Randi, and dpJudas have all poured way more into this project than the rest of the development team combined. And counting the Zandronum fork, the same applies to the 3 plus Torr Samaho. And they get absolutely nothing for it.
Are there any examples of failed open-source projects that you would consider "notable" or "aesops of development"?
ZDoomGL - it had a multiple points of failure, however, that ultimately led to its demise - one being that the project was hugely ambitious for its own goals, and eventually simply crushed itself under its own weight. The author simply couldn't work on it anymore, leaving ZDoom without a GL port until Graf pulled some code in from PrBoom+ about 13-14 years ago to create GZDoom.
Bonus 1: Is GZDoom considered a "notable open-source project" to you?
Yes. It's certainly no Linux - nor anywhere near as popular. But it's a project that's near and dear to the hearts of every person who's deeply involved in it. And plus, the creative projects that are spawned from it are in fact even nowadays used in FOSS operating system distributions (for example: Wolfenstein BOA was recently inducted into Ubuntu's SNAP repository).
Bonus 2: To anyone who has used Subversion, Git and Mercurial, which one do you prefer, which is your second choice, and why?
Git 100% of the way. It's what I use and I don't really want to learn the others.
-
Dark-Assassin
- Posts: 742
- Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 3:40 am
- Location: South Australia
Re: Questions about open source development
Fortunately for BitBucket users, Git is available for it now days. No need to use Mercurial there anymore.Rachael wrote:Bonus 2: To anyone who has used Subversion, Git and Mercurial, which one do you prefer, which is your second choice, and why?
Git 100% of the way. It's what I use and I don't really want to learn the others.