How are hacks monitored, or are they?

[sportsoutlaw]

How can we find out, other than asking in a thread about updates to a modification?

My concern in this situation is vbookie, in which the last update was for 3.5.3. People, including me have asked in the thread over the past few weeks, but there is no answer that I know of.

This is not a complaint ( I am not going to complain about something that is free), but the hack does not work in 3.6 and this hack is the only thing I am waiting for to do my upgrade. If it is not going to be updated I can simply go forward with the upgrade as I am in a very short window of slow time on my site for about 2 more weeks and then maybe pursue a coder to build a new system.

Thanks in advance for any assistance.

[Zachery]

They are not, short of receving or discovering a security report, if the author stops supporting it the hack is left as is depending on how their license is.

In short we do not ask, force, or require in anyway hack authors to update their code.

[Chris M]

You may however take it upon yourself to either alter the code or hire someone via the Service Requests forum to alter the code for you, but neither you nor the person who altered it for you can release the code for free, paid or otherwise without the consent of the original author

Chris

[sportsoutlaw]

I am well aware of my options to get the hack updated for myself personally, and what I can and cannot do with something I end up hiring someone to do.

I was simply asking if there was any structure in place for keeping up with what hacks are or are not upated. Zachery answered that question very clearly and the quick respons is most appreciated.

[FASherman]

Lets think about this for a moment. Developers who post their code here do receive the benefit of a large amount of feedback that helps them refine, improve and enhance their code. They are given access to a community of beta testers, in many cases that have equal or better programming skills, that assist them in their development effort.

In return for that, as part of your TOS, can't you state that any hack that goes unsupported for a specificed period by the author reverts to a GNU GPL license? That would allow any other developer to pick up the code and continue the work, releasing it to the community, when the author is no longer available or reachable?

Its ridiculous that some very good initial work is allowed to go fallow for lack of support and that we've adopted this crazy system where no one else can pick up the ball and run with it.

Supported code should never be usurped or plagiarized. I think we all agree with that. But unsupported code should not fall to the wayside when there are other capable of advancing it.

[Marco van Herwaarden]

Sorry but copyright laws only look who created an "original work", not if it is maintained or not.

We might have an optional License Agreement in future for Modifications releases in the near future that could take care of these things, but that will always be optional.

[Revan]

I agree with Marco in saying it should be optional.
Even though it's set in stone, allow me to present a scenario: A draft. What if a coder is summoned to the army? Here in Norway, when your 18 you can get summoned for a whole year of military training at a base somewhere where its even colder than down in southern Norway where I am. Luckily they didn't make me go
I know I would hate to come back, ready to resume coding, then find that some random person took over my hack

[KW802]

Originally Posted by Zachery

They are not, short of receving or discovering a security report, if the author stops supporting it the hack is left as is depending on how their license is. ...

Slightly related subject...

Would it be possible for a hack submitter to request a review of a hack that they've submitted for any possible security problems?

[Marco van Herwaarden]

There are no official procedures inplace at the moment for such a review. But a coder is always free to ask another coder to have a look.

[FASherman]

Originally Posted by Marco van Herwaarden

Sorry but copyright laws only look who created an "original work", not if it is maintained or not.

Actually, thats not entirely true.

Copyrights can also be shared and transfered and that is what is at issue here. By virtue of using this site, coders should agree to a shared copyright with the site.

At such time as the coser stops supporting their hack for a specified period of time, they agree that the copyright is then transfered in whole to the site.

The site may then decide to share that copyright with another coder who offers to take over maintenance/development.

Its not difficult to come up with the legalese for the agreement, nor is it difficult to implement agreeing to the terms with the upload or coming up with a request system to take over the code.

And here's a neat little feature...

Since its a shared copyright, if the coder who takes over the code cannot do so with the intention of making it commercial.

And, since the code originally uploaded is a shared copyright, for the coder to make a commercial version, you can wrap up legal language that the site transfers its shared portion of the copyright only if the author maintains a "lite" version for X number of months.

While I realize this site isn't an offical Jelsoft site, there are close ties to Jelsoft. I'm sure their legal counsel offer a more indepth analysis of the idea, but it is very possible and would solve multiple problems.