DragonBox OpenSource Coding Competition - Rules (DRAFT!)

[_wb_]

To address the argument of "we need closed source or we will lose entries": I hereby declare that I will not participate in the contest (and will not continue work on an improved version of my little GPL'ed game Microbes) if this is not going to be an open source contest.


There, now symmetry is restored. Open source required or not, both could lose entries.


Edit: Why do my posts end up being the first post of a new page all the time?

 

[Amnykon]

I feel that to get the most out of the competition, it needs to be open source. The purpose of the competition is to promote software development for open handhelds, so that we may have more software. With only a two month time span for the competition, none of the games are going to be completely done, in fact I think there will be many prototypes that need to be further developed. I fear that people will enter the contest with their half written game, then once it is over, they abandoned it. With closed software, there is nothing that can be done to remedy this. With open software, if the writer abandons it, someone else may take over the project and eventually it may be finished. That is why I committed to add 10 features to a ranking program. Once I am involved in the project, I may even add more. I encourage you to commit to directly supporting the winning entries according your skills. If we had more programmers some artists and even a music composer, we could have a highly polished game within six months. I think that should be the major goal of this competition. This is not possible if we allow closed source entries.


Also ED wants the codes to be portable to all open handhelds, even future open handhelds. If the source is closed this work can only be done by the writer. I doubt the work would be done. With open source, if there is a will, there is a way.

 

[Binky]

Random though attached.

 

[b_o_b]

To address the argument of "we need closed source or we will lose entries": I hereby declare that I will not participate in the contest (and will not continue work on an improved version of my little GPL'ed game Microbes) if this is not going to be an open source contest.

I guess you are not looking for a win-win solution?


A new category for best closed software looks like one to me. Then you will have 4 prices for the preferred open source entries and one for the closed source entries.


I think it will be interesting to see what the quality of closed source will be compared to the open sourced apps/games then. Allowing closed sourced apps/games may attract some Indie developers to share a couple of levels for a new game or release a demo.


The emphasis would be still on open source then, joining with an open source game/app will give you a bigger chance to win something.


Just an idea

 

[_wb_]

DragonBox OpenSource Coding Competition - Category 5: Closed-Source Software.


Meh, fine with me, sounds like a typical surreal Belgian compromise

 

[erico]

I prefer this:


DragonBox Open Choice of Source Coding Competition.

 

[ekianjo]

This is getting a little ridiculous. In the repo we accept both open and closed source, so why is it suddenly an issue to accept closed-source software for a competition ? In the end it's up to ED, I guess, to make a final choice on this, but obviously if there are some people who want to further work on their project after these 2 months and make it into a paying app/game later on, that alternative is killed if it is released in open-source to begin with.


And it's not like Pandora has "too much software to deal with" - at this stage, in this small community, ANY additional piece of software should be welcome and encouraged. Putting restrictions is always going to have an impact. And let the judges and the competition draw out the better softs out there, based on quality and not just licence.

 

[EvilDragon]

Good posts about the sourcecode and judges.


I've updated the draft. Let me know if you think it's better like that

 

[_wb_]

So now being open source is completely optional? That's kind of disappointing to me, especially for a compo called "DragonBox OpenSource Coding Competition". If those are going to be the final rules, I'm not going to participate - that is not the kind of compo I want to support, I don't want to encourage hypocrisy (use "OpenSource" in the name to appeal to that community, but in the fine print it turns out to be hollow words).


I think it would be better to keep the open source requirement, and if you really want to get closed source submissions, you can allows those to participate but not win a prize unless the source gets released, or make an extra category for those.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

+1


(but i'd participate even with dirty closed-source competitors, just for having the pleasure of spanking their asses)

 

[mcobit]

+1


(but i'd participate even with dirty closed-source competitors, just for having the pleasure of spanking their asses)

You are quite confident


When do you announce your new project?


Will it be another distribution?

 

[Linux-SWAT]

It's only to put pressure on them, so they will make mistakes ^^.


I have no release plan yet, and i won't tell until the skeleton is up and running. Like SL4P, i think the most long and difficult part will be to polish things.

 

[ekianjo]

So now being open source is completely optional? That's kind of disappointing to me, especially for a compo called "DragonBox OpenSource Coding Competition". If those are going to be the final rules, I'm not going to participate - that is not the kind of compo I want to support, I don't want to encourage hypocrisy (use "OpenSource" in the name to appeal to that community, but in the fine print it turns out to be hollow words).


I think it would be better to keep the open source requirement, and if you really want to get closed source submissions, you can allows those to participate but not win a prize unless the source gets released, or make an extra category for those.

I think the name has been updated ("DragonBox Coding Competition" only).


I would be OK with an extra category and prize limitation (maybe half of the prize money if the source is not disclosed, for example.


I think that most people will anyway not participate for the money (we are all likely to put several dozens of hours in each project, and even if you get the first prize it's less than working at McDonalds for the same amount of time), but at least what the user does with their code is their ultimate right, while you can encourage them to be more "open" with what you mentioned above.


Respecting Open-Source also goes with Respect for Closed-Source, just like CopyLeft would not exist without the CopyRight concept. Pandora itself is a testament to the power of Open-Source, but let's not create a place where Open-source becomes a Must to be eligible.

 

[Amnykon]

if there are some people who want to further work on their project after these 2 months and make it into a paying app/game later on, that alternative is killed if it is released in open-source to begin with.

I disagree. An copyright owner may release one version under an opensource license, then turn around and release the same or upgraded version as propitiatory. As long as all of the copyright owners agree, every single licencing item may be changed, with exception of the already released outdated code. If this is what you want to do, I would recommend the apache license. If someone else contributes to the software under the apache, your only restriction is that the license must be free. This is Goggles strategy with chrome and chromium. One is open source the other is not. They are both licensed under the apache license. I prefer GPL, but any contributions must be left out of propitiatory software.

 

[_wb_]

Pandora itself is a testament to the power of Open-Source, but let's not create a place where Open-source becomes a Must to be eligible.

Why not?


Of course anyone is free to try to sell binaries to whoever wants to buy them, or freely distribute those binaries while keeping the source a well-guarded secret, but isn't the point of "OpenSource Handhelds" to promote Open Source (and maybe even Free) Software? To me, that is exactly what makes this community interesting and attractive, and I would be very disappointed if "Open Source" turns out to be just a buzzword without any meaning.


Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with people who want to release closed-source software. I just don't think we should be organizing community contests for that, and I would object if "dev fund" donations would be used to pay for prizes for closed-source software.

 

[PowerGod]

I'm with the ones who want to give better prizes for open projects, cause is the software that makes a device useful, even if it's closed... I'm mainly a Windows user, and the majority of programs I use are closed, but are someway better than the alternatives open I can found...


I just want to point one thing, if the "entry" is something directly related to the system or the hardware, like optimized drivers or a new OS Interface, then IT MUST BE OPEN, but if it's a standalone game or something similar, then I have no problem with it if it's closed.

 

[iprice]

I'm with the ones who want to give better prizes for open projects, cause is the software that makes a device useful, even if it's closed...

That makes no sense. If it's software that makes a device useful - the device doesn't become less useful if the software is closed.


Why should closed software entries receive lesser prizes than open? Just as much time and work may have gone into them. And the community will still be receiving software, which is the aim of the competition. Or is open source more important than the software itself? :blink:

 

[Rockthesmurf]

Fact: Making the competition open source only makes some entries impossible.


Fact: Making the competition closed source only (meaning you must not ever distribute any part of the source for the entry) makes some entries impossible.


Fact: Making the competition open to both closed source and open source, means all entries are possible (unless developers object so strongly to the rules that they decide not to enter on moral grounds).


So, if the aim is to get as many good entries as possible, an open to all competition would make the most sense. If the aim is to get as much open source software as possible (which can then be rebuilt by the community to other platforms etc.) then it obviously makes sense to make the competition open source.

 

[iprice]

So, if the aim is to get as many good entries as possible, an open to all competition would make the most sense.

Yep. That's how I see it too.

 

[WizardStan]

So, if the aim is to get as many good entries as possible, an open to all competition would make the most sense.

Yep. That's how I see it too.

Then we disagree on what the aim of the competition is and we should ask EvilDragon to clarify. Is the competition intended just to increase the quantity of software, or is it to promote the consoles as open source?


If the former then I have no actual objection, but I was under the impression that it was the latter, that the point of the contest was to say "hey, check out these open source consoles based on open source software and some of the awesome things others have done", in which case it does seem rather hypocritical to me to allow closed source software.