search

NOP0 / rustmatic

PLC programming in Rust!
Apache License 2.0
35 stars 2 forks source link

Private repository? #7

Closed Michael-F-Bryan closed 4 years ago

Michael-F-Bryan commented 4 years ago

Is there any particular reason why this repository is private instead of public?

NOP0 commented 4 years ago

I guess it's mostly historical, the repository started out as some loose ideas about what a PLC environment needed etc, so I did not see the need for it being public.

I don't have any issues going public at some point. There's a few small details that IMHO should be done first however.

  1. Update of the README so that the landing page is, correct (i.e. no_std as feature removed) and aligned with what is realistically possible (i.e. Is download in run realistic?) and maybe enhanced (current features/state,contributors, license) Other things?
  2. Adding a LICENSE?
  3. Adding a disclaimer about not using this software for dangerous stuff, no guarantees given type of thing? (Given that PLC stuff is generally more dangerous than normal computing)

Should there be a MVP before going public? Other stuff?

Michael-F-Bryan commented 4 years ago

I guess it's mostly historical, the repository started out as some loose ideas about what a PLC environment needed etc, so I did not see the need for it being public.

Ah that makes sense. I usually default to making things public because it means other people can see it and you get free travis CI.

Other things?

I like to get CI to publish useful things like the API docs for master and the Design Docs to GitHub Pages. That way you can add a link to them at the top of the project README for when you're feeling lazy and don't want to cd into the correct directory to run cargo doc --open or mdbook serve --open.

My mdbook-html experiment is probably a good example of this, see the .travis.yml file for an indicator of what is involved.

Thoughts?

Adding a LICENSE?

I usually dual license under MIT and Apache-2.0 because that's what they recommend in the API guidelines and, as someone who gets paid to write code, I like it when you're allowed to use cool things as part of a commercial product. That's the main reason I tend to shy away from the GPL.

(i.e. Is download in run realistic?)

What do you mean by "download in run"? If it is the ability to upload and download arbitrary programs while the runtime is running I feel like that's a reasonable goal.

Adding a disclaimer about not using this software for dangerous stuff, no guarantees given type of thing?

Sounds like a good idea. I think there's normally a clause for exactly that in both the MIT and Apache licenses, but it's probably best to reiterate that bad things can happen if you write a dodgy program or the runtime has bugs.

Michael-F-Bryan commented 4 years ago

Done!