Why not open source some of UCCNC

[rmoen]

New to UCCNC - just got a C94 board w/ uc300eth.

Spent a hour trying to figure out why i couldn't get a pin to activate (16, port 2) and decided to uninstall 1.2115 and try 1.2113, and volla, it worked. No idea why. I tried uninstalling and reinstalling 1.2115 but that didn't make a difference.

Looking at the forum and facebook page, there seems to be a growing frustration around software releases, either too infrequent, new versions having issues, etc. Why not open source parts of the project so people can just fix some of the stuff? I'm a former c# dev, but heck I'd even just update documentation if it helped the greater good. I'm sure you could keep the license part closed source, so you wouldn't change licensing etc.

Come on, let's make this thing even better.

[ger21]

UCCNC is under constant development, with new features constantly being added. Bugs are fixed with every new release.
The previous release was a massive update, with a ton of new features. The last update was released 3 weeks ago.

[cncdrive]

I don't think it would be a good idea to make it open source as it could lead to unverified codes and software versions causing problems to customers.
We made a new release 3 weeks ago and already working on the next release.

I'm not sure why your code did not work with switching the output, but maybe you can show your code to let us check.

[Precision Composites]

UCCNC is under constant development, with new features constantly being added. Bugs are fixed with every new release.
The previous release was a massive update, with a ton of new features. The last update was released 3 weeks ago.

What's the latest update? Still showing 1.2113 on the website.

[cncdrive]

All updates are listed here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=240&start=50
Latest one is 1.2117, but 1.2118 is on it's way soon.

[charliem]

Latest one is 1.2117, but 1.2118 is on it's way soon

But aren't these beta releases and not official releases?

[A_Camera]

New to UCCNC - just got a C94 board w/ uc300eth.

Spent a hour trying to figure out why i couldn't get a pin to activate (16, port 2) and decided to uninstall 1.2115 and try 1.2113, and volla, it worked. No idea why. I tried uninstalling and reinstalling 1.2115 but that didn't make a difference.

Looking at the forum and facebook page, there seems to be a growing frustration around software releases, either too infrequent, new versions having issues, etc. Why not open source parts of the project so people can just fix some of the stuff? I'm a former c# dev, but heck I'd even just update documentation if it helped the greater good. I'm sure you could keep the license part closed source, so you wouldn't change licensing etc.

Come on, let's make this thing even better.

UCCNC is not a freeware. It's a commercial product.

If you have issues with the test versions then don't install them, use only the official releases.

[cseyler]

Just my 2 cents:

UCCNC only works with your hardware. WOuld it be a problem to increase the cost of the hardware to include the uccnc licence fee ?

I don't think it would be a good idea to make it open source as it could lead to unverified codes and software versions causing problems to customers.
We made a new release 3 weeks ago and already working on the next release.

I'm not sure why your code did not work with switching the output, but maybe you can show your code to let us check.

It is the opposite. The owner of the project has always the possibility to validate the pushed code before merging it. The fix / feature adding process is really faster to allow people to build an intermediar release (commonly called nightly release) before any "official release" (RC, beta of final)
Having a large community that actively contribute to a project leads to a better quality product because your small team has to focus to fixing bug, adding some features instead of spending time to refactoring,...

[A_Camera]

Just my 2 cents:

UCCNC only works with your hardware. WOuld it be a problem to increase the cost of the hardware to include the uccnc licence fee ?

I think that would be a problem, because those who are not using UCCNC would not like it. Remember that the hardware is also working with Mach3 and Mach4... so those users would demand a discount. I think it is better as it is, i.e. kept separate and pay for each license.

It is the opposite. The owner of the project has always the possibility to validate the pushed code before merging it. The fix / feature adding process is really faster to allow people to build an intermediar release (commonly called nightly release) before any "official release" (RC, beta of final)
Having a large community that actively contribute to a project leads to a better quality product because your small team has to focus to fixing bug, adding some features instead of spending time to refactoring,...

I have the opposite opinion. I think it is good that UCCNC is not open source. This way there is control over the software and the hardware. There are a lot of open source software out there, and they have one thing in common, which is: very poor user support. In some communities the "support" given to almost every question is "read the f-ing manual jerk" and then there are discussions among the contributors which the general public, or the rare visitor won't understand or have difficulties to catch up with. Here, we get answers almost immediately from either cncdrive, or a user. That would be totally destroyed if it was open source, because group responsibility means no responsibility.