Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I am totally agree with cnb. We are waiting for the release 1.0 promised on first quarterly 2011.

till now XE2 , firemonkey, 64 Bits, and ext JS 4.0 are available , and unigui is not ready for them.

it is difficult to start big project when we are not sure that all features and linked tools are taken in account on time.

Farshad your tool is simply wonderfool !! , please found a solution to speed up the development.

 

eric

Posted

My team has already started a big project that is based on UniGUI. We solved many problems, but there are still a number of critical improvements UniGUI to be solved in the near future Mr. Farhad. Open source would help to accelerate the development process. For this technology - the future!

Posted

I think that Mr. Farhad prefer that you pay for him and he will employ more people.

At the same time, I guess there is only him who develop this project with his great perseverance. It is really not easy!

Posted

IMHO, Farshad should release 1.0 asap with the most important features in the Version 1.0 survey that can be implemented by end of this year. The feature list should be frozen and announced right away. Some of us may not he happy with the final cut, but at least we get a GA product. The remaining items to come in the subsequent releases.Farshad can then get some return on his investment for this product and perhaps contract with some additional developers to maintain the development momentum. I'm about 60% complete with my own UniGUI project.

Posted

To be accelerated framework development, some of them should be opened source, at least at a components level.

So the features will be extended by many developer.

 

Maybe, Opening the ways to plugged-in (extended/override) by developer is the first priority.

That will make a "Components and Code Samples" section of UniGUI forums were contained with a many benefit code.

 

 

By the way, this is an idea and trying of Farshad to be extended an ExtPascal, Of course, all of us are also benefited.

We should think in his side, he should received some reward for his action. :)

Posted

I do not agree to convert to open source.

In many cases, and are hardly exceptions where open source projects go. I prefer to pay by the component and have a good product. That works, no need to name the advance payment components as DevExpress, TMS, Devart and others are becoming best features thanks to the constant income received by these companies, this model works.

Posted

What usually happens with open source projects in Delphi is that the project goes open source and it's still the same one man that works with the code, so we don't gain anything. If Farshad feels like going open source, then of course I will not complain, but I definitely will not blame him for keeping it closed source.

Posted

The target is not to blame Farshad, who did till now a great job. If today there is this kind of forum with a lott coming going comments , with a lot of people expected new released and new tips, shows that farshad's idea was at the beginning a wonderful idea. and all people like me are behind him, and expected. so now concretely this forum is just to say how to improvet the product , enhanceit , plug it on last third party tool quickly to be up-to-date. is the open source the right way ?, do we need to push money in order to multiply the farshad's team ? i don't known.

what i know is that today the compeptitor are not so lot of , there is not too much rad with framework like that, but it should be come in a couple of month thru php zend framework, thru directy with extjs or other symphony.

So If you have concrete ideas how to unlock this product and speed up the development , feel free to talk it here .

 

Really thanks very much M. Farshad for this great job , and let us know if any ideas,

 

Eric

Posted

Hi all !!!

 

It is very good to read all that have written by all you. In my opinion I think that both models (Open and Close Source) have good things and bad things. At the end is a Farshad's choice decide with way is better for him and for the project, but in any case he must think that the Project (UNIGUI) will be bigger and bigger and the maintenance will be more complex in every step. Is a very good project, is very good idea, but will necessary more and more power to continue developing it. I think there are 3 way:

 

1- Keep the project as is now, but with more human resources.

2- Keep the project as is now, but give the possibility to third party to build over UNIGUI offering guidelines, resources, etc.

3- Open the project totally and stay as a GURU with the guidelines, and Center for Quality Control.

 

(May be a mix of them)

 

In any of the choices he will need a money back to pay for the time used for this. So I think with a mix of 1 and 2 will be good for him, for project and for us.

 

It is all my opinion.

  • 2 years later...
Posted

I agree on "OpenSource" in that way, that Farshad should sell licenses with source code as soon as possible.

 

I have soo many small bugs in my large project that I would like to fix, and sending Farshad a demo project for every little bug is not very productive. Instead, if I could debug into the sourcecode, I could have sent Farshad at least 10 ready-to-go bugfixes in the past 2 months without effort.

 

This is how other tool developers handle it tooo - why reinvent the wheel?

 

Farshad, I truely admire your work, but I am afraid you won't get the show on the road if you keep all the sources hidden.

  • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...