[I-mobile-u] iMobileU Site: Existing Framework Users

[Dave Olsen]

I don't think our fork should be listed there. I think that would be
way too confusing. I have no problem for the iMobileU site to be
basically focused on the central versions of the code. Maybe there
could be a special "forks" tab under framework where a brief intro to
the project could be. I appreciate the offer though.

I really have no idea how it could be listed other than to somehow
list schools by version. For example:

Schools Using the Framework

v0.9
 - UNC
 - UND

v2
 - MIT

Forked
 - WVU

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Justin Anderson <jander at mit.edu> wrote:
> I agree that we shouldn't be listing everyone simply as users of the exact same framework. I'd personally want it kept as one list, but to have its title reworded to show that there are many implementations which are based in some part on MIT's code. Also, since we already have Harvard's fork listed above the list of members, would you want WVU's fork listed there as well?
>
> Justin
>
> On Nov 19, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Dave Olsen wrote:
>
>> I didn't want this issue coming out of left-field at the conference
>> call today so I'm starting the conversation on the list.
>>
>> While I appreciate having my school (West Virginia University) listed
>> it sort of gives visitors the impression that we're either using your
>> stock framework or the current edition. Unfortunately that's not the
>> case. The iMobileU framework definitely served as our base but we've
>> obviously hacked it to death. I also put in a fair bit of effort
>> trying to document and share what we had done when it seemed the
>> original release was just going to languish. We appear to have pushed
>> ourselves past the point of any sort of merge of efforts especially
>> when looking at the "future" code for the framework. I'm leery of
>> giving future developers the impression that they can use your code to
>> get our style or vice versa. There are a few other schools on your
>> list that might cause the same confusion because they've also used our
>> version of the code.
>>
>> I'm not thrilled that Mobile Web OSP has turned into a full-on fork
>> but I guess that's what happened. There should either be clarification
>> provided that at least our school is using a derivative of your
>> framework or it should be removed. I would hope that you also give
>> other schools the option to opt-in to the list or clarify editions of
>> the framework people are using.
>>
>> Again, I fully appreciate your original work served as a basis for
>> what we're doing and I try to give credit to you all whenever I talk
>> about mobile. I'm just not sure that qualifies us as "existing
>> framework users."
>>
>> --
>>
>> Proud supporter of DC United
>> _______________________________________________
>> I-mobile-u mailing list
>> I-mobile-u at mit.edu
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/i-mobile-u
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> I-mobile-u mailing list
> I-mobile-u at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/i-mobile-u
>



-- 

Proud supporter of DC United