Not trying to be personal, but I'm afraid developers rarely do. And this is from someone who has been programming since the early 1980's. When we have our pet project (even if it's an older pet), we generally hang onto it much longer than we "should". In one of my previous lives of doing and getting research from the lab to real-life, a key understanding, after 10 years, was that a) if you're thinking about it then it's time NOW (probably yesterday), b) if anyone is asking about it then it's time NOW, and c) if you're working on the next thing then it's time NOW (but employ someone else to do it). Oh, and this in an organisation which created commercial closed-source, commercial and free open-source, and free software.
> The technical details are pretty serious, because they prevent one
> possible goal: more people playing the game.
I don't understand - could you make it clearer how opening the source stops a) people playing the game, and b) MORE people playing the game? The recording industry seems to be finding that making things available for free, like single tracks and downloads, increases their sales. Given the dearth of a sizable community around KoDP - citing the few mesgs in list over the years as an example - I would think that creating more of a community could only help the game. There's been no new edition for ages, and no new marketting that I have heard, so one of the ways to assist a community forming would be to open-source it. I'm not suggesting free software of course, just open-source.
I fully admit I know no details and would totally concede that the sales figures may show a continual and increasing number of buyers, and users on other lists than this one, and that A-sharp is happy with the continual and increasing sales that have already paid the development, marketing and distribution costs long ago.
Robert
Powered by hypermail