26 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2019
    1. Some time ago I asked on Reddit: “What’s the consensus among the React community for testing React components?” Shawn Wang replied: “testing is an enormously complicated and nuanced topic on which there isn’t a consensus anywhere in JS, much less in React.” I was not trying to find the best library for testing React. Mainly because there isn’t one.
  2. Oct 2019
    1. Issues can be funded by anyone and the money will be transparently distributed to the contributors handling a particular issue.
    2. If you are using Utility-Types please consider donating as this will guarantee the project will be updated and maintained in the long run.
    1. Their hope by announcing so loudly what they have accomplished, is that others in the Android modder/hacker scene will step up and help them turn this root exploit into something useful for users by deploying features that are not currently available through the Google controlled Chromecast experience.
  3. Sep 2019
  4. Aug 2019
    1. I'm working full time on Material-UI since 2019. I was working on it during my free time before that. I hope that I can leverage my full-time involvement in the library to make it really awesome. You are right, the project is well-funded. We hope we can fund the time of more than 1 person full time in the future, with the current growth rate, it should soon be possible. We have 3 people working part-time on the project (Matt, Sebastian and Josh), plus the community behind us (+1,000 code contributors).
  5. May 2019
    1. By “Infrastructure” we mean

      ​The definition of "open infrastructure" (or the software component of open infrastructure) should include an explicit requirement for open-source code.​ Even an explicit recommendation short of a requirement would be better than the current definition, which is entirely silent the value of opening the code. The Elsevier acquisition of bepress (to use one example among many) would have been much less harmful to the community if the code had been open and user institutions could hold on to the platform, fork it if they wanted, take it in their own direction, and continue using it without becoming Elsevier customers.

  6. Apr 2019
    1. So in theory, one could imagine an organization that produces a different kind of document. Instead of a license for the source code, they would provide a way to say uh, let’s go with “Open Development Certified.” Projects could then submit for certification, they’d get accepted or rejected.

      This sounds a lot like the Apache trademark, to me.

  7. Dec 2018
    1. OSS contribution takes time; I don't think anyone would contest that. Getting familiar with a project, finding out where you can fit into it, reading and responding to issues, testing and submitting patches, writing documentation. All of that requires a good deal of time.

      I reached out to a prominent OSS company preferring a "history of open source contributions" and put forward the idea that people who code for a living don't always have the opportunity. The response was surprisingly hostile:

      It doesn't exclude anyone. Zero chance I'm going to have a debate about it.

  8. Nov 2018
    1. The Moodle project

      Moodle is one of the largest open source collaborative platform used in the development of curriculum.

      Moodle is an Australian company and has various levels of subscriptions including one level for free. Overall I have found the site to be user friendly rich with demos, documentation and support including community forums. This site supports multiple languages and has an easy to use drop down menu for that selection.

      RATING: 5/5 (rating based upon a score system 1 to 5, 1= lowest 5=highest in terms of content, veracity, easiness of use etc.)

  9. Dec 2015
    1. if the group should decide to fork Moodle together

      Contrary to Free Software, Open Source has special affordances for forking, even if the forks become commercial.

    2. alliance of Moodle service providers that currently collaborate on Moodle-related projects of mutual interest
  10. Nov 2015
    1. The four freedoms don’t limit us as creators — they open possibilities for us as creators and consumers. When you apply them to software, you get Linux, Webkit/Chrome, and WordPress. When you apply them to medicine, you get the Open Genomics Engine, which is accelerating cancer research and bringing us closer to personalized treatment. When you apply them to companies, you get radically geographically distributed, results-based organizations like Automattic. When you apply them to events you get TEDx, Barcamp, and WordCamp. When you apply them to knowledge, you get Wikipedia.
    2. as of December 2013, 21% of websites are powered by WordPress. One-fifth of the web is built with a tool that anyone can use, change, or improve, whenever and however they want (even more when you count other open source projects
    3. B2 was ultimately abandoned by its creator. If I’d been using it under a proprietary license, that would have been the end — for me, and all its other users. But because we had freedoms 2 and 3, Mike Little and I were able to use the software as a foundation
    4. I’ve spent a third of my life building software based on Stallman’s four freedoms, and I’ve been astonished by the results. WordPress wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for those freedoms, and it couldn’t have evolved the way it has. WordPress was based on a program called B2/cafelog that predated it by two years. I was using B2 because it had freedoms 0 and 1
    1. The Free Software Foundation's definition of free software, originally expressed by Richard Stallman. It is free as in free speech, not as in free beer. Software offered for a fee can still be free. A program is free software if the users have four essential freedoms:

      0. Run the program as you wish, for any purpose.<br> 1. Study the source code, and change it as you please.<br> 2. Copy and distribute the original program.<br> 3. Copy and distribute modified versions.

  11. Feb 2014