[besson3c]

Hello,

A working demo of my first software release is now online, I'm calling it the NetMusician webkit:

http://netmusician.org/webkit.php

Actually, I'm not sure if the completion of this web content management software can be considered a release, but at any rate, this has been the result of several hours of work and years of working with musicians. It also is the amalgamation of my past work in developing personal musician CMSes, as it allows me to manage all of my musician CMSes under a single codebase.

In addition to your general feedback and comments (if you have any), I've also been stewing over releasing this software as open source. There are literally hundreds of different CMSes out there, so I'm not sure if mine would offer any value. Also, I'm not sure if it would be wisest strategy, or how to go about declaring the software as open source.

Does anybody have any thoughts in this regard? Experiences to share? General opinions? If you were a musician, would this be interesting to you? Would it create some hype and draw attention to me if you aren't a systems admin who would be installing this? All of this has been what I've been contemplating.

Sorry to devote a thread to shill my own stuff, but consider your feedback a personal favor to me that I'll greatly appreciate.

[DeathToWindows]

hm. I can't offer any guidance on the musician bit, but as a developer who learned to code with a bunch of open-source people, I'd say that unless there is a compelling reason not to do so that you should open it up. I develop custom controller software for psychophysical testing based in C++ and as it is for psych research, i open my code under GPL 2.0. This boils down to the following: no commercial works w/o permission and all modified source must come back to the SourceForge page.

as there are only about 20 people on the planet who want this thing, it's a pretty small market.

[Artful Dodger]

besson, nice work. well done and a great idea. That is all I am qualified to comment on. happy thankgiving.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by DeathToWindows

hm. I can't offer any guidance on the musician bit, but as a developer who learned to code with a bunch of open-source people, I'd say that unless there is a compelling reason not to do so that you should open it up. I develop custom controller software for psychophysical testing based in C++ and as it is for psych research, i open my code under GPL 2.0. This boils down to the following: no commercial works w/o permission and all modified source must come back to the SourceForge page.

as there are only about 20 people on the planet who want this thing, it's a pretty small market.

Thanks for the info! I didn't know you could legally restrict usage to non-commercial use. This does change things... I'll need to look into this further. Do you have any suggestions for getting started in learning more about this? I'd definitely like to open this up at some point, as long as it is practical and worth my time and effort.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Artful Dodger

besson, nice work. well done and a great idea. That is all I am qualified to comment on. happy thankgiving.

That is all you are qualified to comment on? I guess that is what makes you an Artful Dodger, huh?

You have a great Thanksgiving too!

[Kevin]

When did Apple start selling these?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Kevin

When did Apple start selling these?

I'm not sure if I even like this picture I made.. I'm just not sure what else would fit well here.

[Cubeoid]

Congratulations besson3c!

[DeathToWindows]

as far as I know, you can ALWAYS restrict to non-commercial use (doesn't sourceforge require this as a part of their user agreement? and don't they justify it under the GPL?)

the fact is, my employer would have my nads if I tried to make my software commerically available - but if it's GPLed and freely available, they're happy (this being said, I'm a lab tech at BUMC).