Thanks first to Piotr for the nice and helpful letter to Santa.
One point I’d like to make is that I’d avoid to add too much stuff at this stage, especially for the essential section: compromises are needed here, I think, so Essential should remain ‘essential’. Pragmatically I’d say let’s see if there are openings, then we can discuss if there is room to include more stuff.
> Le 11 juil. 2016 à 12:36, Paterson, Duncan <[log in to unmask]> a écrit :
> Dear All,
> I would like to add the ability to read and write oxygen project files as a should have feature to this wishlist. I can see a few scenarios where this would come in handy, and it would help to justify using a proprietary editor in teaching, since I imagine licensing would prevent such a feature from being implemented in free and open editors.
>> On 11 Jul 2016, at 12:16, Serge Heiden <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Hi Martin,
>> Le 10/07/2016 18:27, Martin Holmes a écrit :
>>> If you want an open-source editor, then presumably you're talking about creating a new editor from scratch, or extending an existing open-source one. I must admit I've been thinking along the lines of a special teaching version of Oxygen; since all our projects make heavy use of Oxygen, teaching people with something substantially different would be rather counter-productive.
>> I understand your concern but open-source doesn't imply that the user experience should be "substantially different" to the one of Oxygen. For this we could add another feature to the set:
>> - the UI should be sufficiently familiar to the equivalent Oxygen UI so that the learning cost to switch to that software is low
>>> Along the same lines, this bit from the wiki page:
>>> "Item 1.7. could imply a very moderate bulk licensing fee paid by the institution that provides training; we have to bear in mind that the entire discussion started because of a department refusing to pay regular licensing fees (deemed as too high) for a course that lasts a semester"
>>> I think we need to aim for a free version. It's not just the issue of the scale of the financial barrier; in many cases, system administrators have to be involved to roll out special builds of software and manage licenses for software which needs to be licensed, and that in itself is a barrier to (for example) rapid deployment for a course which is opportunistically arranged at short notice.
>> I don't understand your point here. How price or pricelessness should be related to licensing modalities?
>> Wouldn't be sufficient to ask for more flexible licensing terms?
>> By the way, I would like here to clearly separate the open-source way of developing software from business models based on selling software. Or to make it simpler:
>> - open-source doesn't imply free (as in beer)
>> - open-source can be sold
>> - free doesn't imply open-source
>> So if you want free stuff, this should be clearly distinguished from open-source development.
>> Dr. Serge Heiden, [log in to unmask], http://textometrie.ens-lyon.fr
>> ENS de Lyon/CNRS - IHRIM UMR5317
>> 15, parvis René Descartes 69342 Lyon BP7000 Cedex, tél. +33(0)622003883