Re: Comprehensive and reliable library?

Thomas Mueller wrote:

"Doug Chamberlin" <dchamberlin at andoversoftware dot org> wrote:

I agree about using a good quality, supported library. However, I
wonder about putting all the eggs in one basket. Perhaps two or
three libraries are called for.

But how does that help you in the case the vendor of any of these
libraries goes out of business? These libraries will usually not be
able to replace each other so you are even in a worse situation:
Trouble if one of N goes belly up vs. trouble if one of one does.

Well, these points come to mind:

1) I always aquire source code. So, if the components are good quality
commercial offerings, I expect that if the company were to dissappear
I'd be able to keep things running for a while.

2) Being familiar with multiple libraries means switching from one to
another would not be as difficult as when I had to switch from a single
one that I was completely "married to" when I haven't spent any time
learning what alternatives are available.

3) Multiple libraries I expect to have some overlap in functionality so
that I could substitute one component for another if really necessary.
Probably would not be seemless but might get enough of the job done to
be worth it. Worse case scenario would be to replace all components
from one vendor with closest equivalents from another. That would be a
pain!

4) I strongly prefer open source from the start.

My short list right now is:
Indy 10
TVirtualListView
Anything open sourced from TurboPower
JCL and JVCL
A handfull of single components from various sources I'm still tracking
down

However, the Indy and JEDI sites are a mess as far as finding organized
collections! The Indy project doesn't even create periodic stable
builds!

--

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: RealThinClient SDK for Linux
    ... I've read extensively on how to make money on open source and for a library I've come to the conclusion that for a library like yours the only real way is for dual licensing. ... I personally believe the record is clear by now that the pure OSS "paid support" path is an economic failure. ... This is another issue with OSS projects, they have to attain a very large following to attract just a few active developers. ... For libraries programmers will either continue to support it as their own code, but don't try to revive the project, or just look for a new actively developed library they can use. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.thirdpartytools.general)
  • Re: PDF Framework for smalltalk systems
    ... I think I need to clarify the term Open Source here. ... That we give the Sources away is a sign of thrust to our customers - the ... I have not had requests to generate PDF from object model yet. ... I don´t know libraries that exposes the PDF contents in the ...
    (comp.lang.smalltalk)
  • Re: Delphi Bugs
    ... about in the seminal book about open source, ... Because it would greatly improve the way packages could be used in Linux. ... to work with new versions of Delphi or the operating system. ... The reason we buy third-party libraries is to save us time. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
    ... >> I'd have thought that if you use a gpl library, for instance, and used ... >> modifications open source too. ... >> library source that's been used and altered not the rest of the app. ... libraries or just a reinvention based on known algorithms ...
    (comp.programming)
  • ANNC: Cells-Gtk: In Search of Cells3 [was Re: Arity of a closure and a Lisp Community Process]
    ... Lispers: Unlimited Energy for Whining, ... Until we push those other languages into the sea and enslave the their captured users we just won't have the resources needed to turn one developer's personal gem into a portable, easily-installed, well-documented open source package. ... Someone spoke to Lisp-NYC about that big Lisp math lib and grabbed me with the analysis of how the laws of threes made open source projects 27 times harder than doing something for yourself. ... And the way to get better Lisp libraries is to work on them, not whine about them and defintely not to create another Lisp Gardeners? ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)