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