Posts: 183
Joined: Oct 2013
It's an ethical issue I'm facing, how long after an addon is broken and not updated by the original author should it be considered abandonned and open to be released in another repository once fixed by a new programmer?
It seems like this has become an issue, and I find it kind of crazy when more than one repository has the same addon in it, the file name of the addon itself should at least be changed to prevent breakage as far as I'm concerned, it's more about the use of the code and the support for the particular destination I'm wondering about.
Posts: 1,338
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation:
12
great ?uestion...
i would like to hear other opinions on this -- especially authors of current addons.
personally, i think if there hasn't been any activity to an addon after 6 months, i would consider it abandoned, and open to (re)releasing.
Linux Mint 18 LTS 64-bit - Kodi 17 Beta6
Odroid-C2 - Libreelec v7.90.009
Posts: 31,445
Joined: Jan 2011
There is no ethical question to it. If someone releases an add-on using an open source license then you can make your own version whenever you want. If the author did not want people doing that then they would have not chosen to use an open source license.
There might be an etiquette question. It might be polite to attempt to collaborate with someone before making a fork, but sometimes the point of a fork is to take things in a totally different direction, or to expirment with a new feature. Posting a fix to a bug right away typically isn't seen as rude in the open source world, though. It's one of the benefits of open source.
Posts: 26,215
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation:
187
It seems to me that you first try and contact the author. If there's no response through various avenues, then fair enough to take it on if you have the time to do so. Obviously with a bumped version and with clear attribution to the previous author as appropriate.
Cheers,
Jonathan
Posts: 3,420
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation:
95
Piers
Retired Team-Kodi Member
Posts: 3,420
My opinion is that if the addon has had no work completed within a one month period and functionality is broken then it's okay to fork. Having said that if it's OS then ... as Ned said.
Posts: 183
Joined: Oct 2013
Side question, should the addon filename be kept the changed or should it be kept the same?
Keeping it the same would effictively mean hijacking future updates to that addon from the original author.
Posts: 31,445
Joined: Jan 2011
Hmm. Choosing a different name is probably the right thing to do. While code is open source, an identity is not always "open". For example: Firefox and Iceweasel.
Posts: 183
Joined: Oct 2013
That's what I thought, perhaps something should be added to the Wiki about this kind of etiquette to try to avoid addon hijacking in the future.
Posts: 17,859
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation:
371
iirc it has something on the wiki.
Try to contact author. After a reasonable amount of time you can request to update the plugin with your own patches provided that you always mention the original author in the headers.
I'd say keep the same ID for the plugin so everyone who has it will also get a fixed version.
Posts: 183
Joined: Oct 2013
My only concern is what happens if two developers can't agree over who should maintain the particular addon at question and decide to use the same file name?
Posts: 1,088
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation:
51
I have 1 addon, I'm not an expert, so take the following with that in mind.
I would much rather be one of two contributors to my addon, than the sole author on something nobody uses. That said, I would be pissed off if I was 90% the way through a complete refactoring of the code and someone releases my old version with a few tweaks.
The etiquette is fairly straight-forward, a reasonable attempt should be made to contact the author. Multiple emails and PMs, posting to issue tracker on Github, comments in the release or WIP thread, and a new post declaring your intent to take over the project would cover all bases, and would be as much as any author could expect of a potential code "usurper".
As for whether the name should change, wouldnt you want it to stay the same for user recognition? Zoidberg addon could become Zoidberg Redux addon.
A related issue is what moral ownership a person has to an idea. For instance, if you see someone working on something, and like the idea, would etiquette dictate that you contact them to offer assistance before copying their idea and trying to "beat them to market"?
