• geoma
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 month ago

      Website states: "It is however not being done as an open source project & there are other options out there if that’s something you need your software to be. It does rely on open source libraries & a number of modified plug-ins for which their changes are being provided to comply with their code licensing requirements.

      Ultimately I don’t want to spend the time to run a properly done open source project when there’s no guarantee of any assistance vs the overhead involved & my time management isn’t great so spending more time on project management isn’t imho a good use of my time."

      I also hold to the view that source code without at least 1 developer is pointless & implies a dead / abandoned project. I do appreciate that it does allow for taking things on if it’s then entered into such a state without any developer(s) attached as I’ve done with some of the plug-ins which has benefited WACUP. So whilst I’m in a position to keep making WACUP I don’t intend on open sourcing all of it & view doing that as the end of my time developing it.

      • Slotos@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Same weird non-sequiturs chain that foobar2000 author uses.

        They could’ve honestly said “I don’t wanna”, and that would be the end of it.