As with any semi-political issue, people are going to have their opinions – some are going to be hardcore for one side or the other, while others are going to opt to remain in the middle.
Software is no different. When it comes to open-source versus closed-source, each provides their own set of advantages and disadvantages and we’re often very particular about which we support (if not both).
Recently, a minor issue cropped up between Enormego and Facebook specifically with regard to the latter’s iPhone application.
Enormego is responsible for the Pull To Refresh project. When the latest version of the Facebook iPhone application was released, the Enormego Developers became curious as to if it was their project:
We’ve seen Pull to Refresh used in a few apps before and always wondered whether or not it was the one we created, but never one as popular as Facebook. I immediately started looking to see if our code made it into their app, it would be awesome to see Facebook using something we wrote.
Upon an investigation of the code, it appears that the code is the same.
Of course, there’s nothing particularly illegal or wrong about this. It’s open-source and this is the nature of the medium, but the Enormego team brings up an interesting point when it comes to the morality of open-source:
To find out that they took our code, re-released it as their own, and take credit for it though? That’s not cool Facebook. Not cool at all. It also violates our license, which states they need to retain our copyright notice when republishing it.
I tend to lean in the direction of the Enormego team. I dig open-source as much as the next person and I’ve definitely built and released projects that have capitalized on the license, but I’ve tried always to give credit where credit is due.
But it’s obvious that not everyone feels this way.
That said, I’m curious: When it comes to the Church, open-source software, and attributing proper credit, how should we respond?
[HT: Enormego]
Speak your mind...