Timeliner is winding down in favor of Timelinize

[mholt]

As stated on this repository's README, this repo is no longer being actively developed, because its successor, Timelinize, is the future.

I hope this isn't disappointing to anyone. In fact, I want you to know how awesome I think Timelinize is, so I want you to see it and try it for yourself.

A screenshot from a much earlier alpha version:

(That's right, there's finally a UI!)

Sometimes I tweet (xeet?) about neat aspects of the project, like how we clean up noisy data from Google Location History, in some cases better than Google does.

If you're a developer, you can email me to request alpha access. I only ask that as an early tester, you provide feedback and be engaged with our community during development. (My email is on the linked website.) That's how we'll make the best possible software. :slightly_smiling_face:

Thank you! Let me know if you have any questions.

[diraneyya]

Is Timelinize open-source software?

[mholt]

Not currently. Maybe in the future. I haven't decided yet. Why?

[diraneyya]

All good. Timeliner was open-source with a very strict AGPL license, you also seem to be a very effective member of the open-source community, so one almost wonders if he/she is missing something when there is no link or mention of a GitHub repository in the successor to what started as an open-source project.

Yet, from what I understand, it is going to be a binary that the user would download, which then parses and displays the user's data, which is stored locally, so all in all it seems like a reasonable arrangment.

Best of luck and thank you for your great contributions. Caddy seems amazing I will surely test it in the next days.

[mholt]

Yeah, I strictly want to prevent Timeliner/Timelinize from being used for commercial gain, especially given how sensitive the data is that it processes. That's why it's strictly local-only.

Timelinize will not be a commercial venture even if it is closed source; the main thing I'm worried about is making it sustainable. It's important that a project like this lives on. I got lucky with Caddy as it has direct business use cases, but Timelinize does not; and I worry that after 7+ years of development, releasing it for free and open collaboration will only compound the burdens on my time.

That said, even if it is closed source, the data and its interoperability will always be very open. That is the nature of its design: local-only, SQLite index, plain files on disk. No encryption, no DRM, no uploading to a third party service, etc. Anyone will be able to query and manipulate their timeline with their own code. The schema is out in plain view. How the files are synced with the schema will be documented. Power users can go to town on it.

Open source has a lot of appealing aspects too, which I'm obviously aware of, and I'm heavily considering. And honestly, I would totally make it open source without question if I could just figure out how to compensate me for my time, given the consumer-oriented nature of this (as opposed to business focus). It really is a tool for me and my family, but is also generally useful and I think the world really needs this and is ready for it. So I want to make sure it gets out there one way or another.

I just want to avoid a situation where I've put it out there, then become so busy trying to make ends meet with other things (like Caddy; or if that loses its sponsorships, I'd have to get a separate full-time job, starving both projects), that it becomes stale.

It will likely be free while in public beta; then eventually I'd like to accept compensation for it. If donations can prove to be sustainable, great -- if not, I can require payment, and I'm not entirely sure how that'd look yet. Open to ideas/suggestions. (I have already given it a lot of thought, though.)

[diraneyya]

I think this is fair and I agree with you in that this is something that the world needs and is ready for.

I'm quite interested in the funding of open source projects and I think that I have found a good system for it. However, the system only works for open-source software with commercial uses.

A piece of software intended for offline personal use, on the other hand, seems to be reasonably best supported by charging a fee for use, as you suggested.

Besides, being a tool for viewing information locally I understand why making the source itself (rather than the data format or the schema) available/open is not necessarily a morally superior position to keeping it closed, under the assumption that there's no foul play or malware involved.

Hence thank you for the explanations and I wish you the best of luck with Caddy and this one.

[mholt]

Thank you! And thanks for understanding. :)