FORUMS
Remove All Ads from XDA

Rule 12 - A New beginning

20,858 posts
Thanks Meter: 10,682
 
By egzthunder1, Member Advocate Admin - Spirit of XDA on 7th April 2017, 05:01 PM
Post Reply Email Thread
Good morning/evening,

As discussed in the other thread we started regarding changes to our site, we promised that we would change things around a bit and one of them was the long standing Sharing Rule (also known as Rule 12). We have worked diligently with the administration and moderation teams to turn the one we had into something that would make developer's works a bit safer from stealing and other unsavory things.
This thread is not meant as an announcement but rather as an open discussion platform so that you (the members/developers) can weigh in before we write it in the stone tablet along with the rest of them. This will be an open discussion regarding this topic only. Also, unlike the previous thread, which was more of a TownHall type of thread, this one WILL be moderated. In other words,

* keep the thread on topic;
* Unrelated posts will be removed;
* Members not adhering to the above two will be disciplined.

We look forward to having good, meaningful feedback from all of you (otherwise we would have added this to the rules like we always do). We want to have good, positive change into this community to make it into a pleasant atmosphere for all.

Without further ado, I give you the beta draft of Rule 12

Quote:

Rule 12 - Sharing

XDA-Developers is based on the principle of sharing to transmit knowledge. This is the cornerstone of our site. Our members and developers freely share their experience, knowledge, and finished works with the rest of the community to promote growth within the developer community, and to encourage those still learning to become better. There are those, however, who take advantage of this model and try to make personal gains from the hard work of others.

In order to preserve the delicate balance between sharing for the good of the community and blatant self-promotion, regular members and developers alike must understand (and agree) to the following:

12-1. Give credits where due - Credits and acknowledgements for using and releasing work which is based on someone else's work are an absolute must. Works reported to have no credits will be taken down until proper acknowledgements are added by the member in question;

12-2. Courtesy - While most of the work released on our site falls under the umbrella of open source, that is not the only license model being used by developers on xda-developers. In order to prevent problems, we ask that if you decide to base your work on someone else's that you check the license model being used (as it might not be as permissive as one may think);

12-3. Re-releasing other's works as your own is forbidden. The code that you release into the wild must have something beyond minor aesthetic changes that makes it better than the last. As this can be subjective, kang reports will be reviewed on a case by case basis. If you feel that your code has been kanged, please contact the Dev Relations team (listed below) if you cannot solve the issue amicably via PM. Please understand that you will be asked to provide evidence to substantiate your claim;

12-4. Developers can issue take down requests (by contacting the Dev Relations team) under the following circumstances:

- in-process builds start showing up on forums when the developer is not yet ready to release the work;
- cases in which another developer is too aggressively soliciting donations or misrepresenting the work (kanging);
- unofficial builds where an official build is already available;

In summary, we want people to have access to work and knowledge alike. Sharing is good and courtesy and ethics go a long way.

Developers with questions, comments, complaints, or concerns about our rules (or anything!) should send a PM to our Dev Relations team (efrant or sykopompos) or to a Moderator. We are here to help!

Have at it!
The Following 55 Users Say Thank You to egzthunder1 For This Useful Post: [ View ] Gift egzthunder1 Ad-Free
 
 
7th April 2017, 05:10 PM |#2  
zelendel's Avatar
Retired Senior Moderator / Mod. Cttee. Retired - The Dark Knight
Flag Watching from the Shadows
Thanks Meter: 19,820
 
More
Liking what I am seeing. Well done
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to zelendel For This Useful Post: [ View ] Gift zelendel Ad-Free
7th April 2017, 05:11 PM |#3  
Quote:
Originally Posted by zelendel

Liking what I am seeing. Well done

Hey bud

Kinda miss seeing you around

Hope you are well....
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to egzthunder1 For This Useful Post: [ View ] Gift egzthunder1 Ad-Free
7th April 2017, 06:26 PM |#5  
BeansTown106's Avatar
Recognized Developer / Contributor
Flag BeanTown USA
Thanks Meter: 54,563
 
Donate to Me
More
looks good to me, no unofficial builds of officially supported devices is the icing on the cake
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to BeansTown106 For This Useful Post: [ View ]
7th April 2017, 06:39 PM |#6  
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeansTown106

looks good to me, no unofficial builds of officially supported devices is the icing on the cake

Let's clarify, for all those developers that have no issue with unofficial builds, they can stay. This would only come into play for those developers who do not wish to allow unofficial builds. A suggestion would be to add that to your OP (many just use a C&P OP with specifics for the device being posted) if you don't want unofficial builds posted.

We will not be removing unofficial builds just for the sake of removing them. The current procedure would be followed, where you would report the post using our Report post feature, making mention in the report that you do not allow unofficial builds of your work.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to jerdog For This Useful Post: [ View ] Gift jerdog Ad-Free
7th April 2017, 06:40 PM |#7  
Recognized Developer / Recognized Contributor
Thanks Meter: 4,114
 
Donate to Me
More
Much better than the old version. One suggestion: When mentioning licenses, make it explicit that distributing any GPL software (like Linux or TWRP) requires making the source code available.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to _that For This Useful Post: [ View ]
7th April 2017, 06:43 PM |#8  
coal686's Avatar
Moderator Committee - lim( trolls + Hammer, trolls,∞) = 0
Flag Tampa-ish, FL
Thanks Meter: 13,714
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeansTown106

looks good to me, no unofficial builds of officially supported devices is the icing on the cake

Just to clarify that point, it only applies if the official build is already out.

Scenario: A ROM team says they don't plan to support phone X because no one on the team owns it and is fine with someone else porting it. So, a non-affiliated developer ports the ROM, but a year later, a member of the official team gets phone X and wants to officially support it. At the point of the release of the official build, no other unofficial builds are allowed, but the original one is grandfathered in. It wouldn't be fair to that developer if his unofficial build that he worked on for the last year was shut down just because someone on the official team changed his mind on owning a device.

Of course, the optimal solution would be for the ROM team to work with and pass on knowledge that helps the unofficial developer and maybe even include him on the team if his work is good.

By the way, none of this is set in stone, so if anyone disagrees with the handling of the above scenario or anything in the revised rule, please provide feedback. We don't necessarily want to get too bogged down in minutiae, but we also want the rule to properly reflect what the community wants. Because in the end, XDA is the community and we are here to support each other.
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to coal686 For This Useful Post: [ View ] Gift coal686 Ad-Free
7th April 2017, 06:46 PM |#9  
Quote:
Originally Posted by _that

Much better than the old version. One suggestion: When mentioning licenses, make it explicit that distributing any GPL software (like Linux or TWRP) requires making the source code available.

We did consider that. But there far too many different types of licenses out there to put them in writing. Thus, we needed a more general model. The gpl requirements still stand, not because of our rules but because of gpl itself. Our rules never have and never will truncate license requirements.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to egzthunder1 For This Useful Post: [ View ] Gift egzthunder1 Ad-Free
7th April 2017, 07:06 PM |#10  
BeansTown106's Avatar
Recognized Developer / Contributor
Flag BeanTown USA
Thanks Meter: 54,563
 
Donate to Me
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerdog

Let's clarify, for all those developers that have no issue with unofficial builds, they can stay. This would only come into play for those developers who do not wish to allow unofficial builds. A suggestion would be to add that to your OP (many just use a C&P OP with specifics for the device being posted) if you don't want unofficial builds posted.

We will not be removing unofficial builds just for the sake of removing them. The current procedure would be followed, where you would report the post using our Report post feature, making mention in the report that you do not allow unofficial builds of your work.

yea thats what i figured, basically developers who allow unofficials can stay, and those who dont are now allowed to report for takedown

Quote:
Originally Posted by coal686

Just to clarify that point, it only applies if the official build is already out.

Scenario: A ROM team says they don't plan to support phone X because no one on the team owns it and is fine with someone else porting it. So, a non-affiliated developer ports the ROM, but a year later, a member of the official team gets phone X and wants to officially support it. At the point of the release of the official build, no other unofficial builds are allowed, but the original one is grandfathered in. It wouldn't be fair to that developer if his unofficial build that he worked on for the last year was shut down just because someone on the official team changed his mind on owning a device.

Of course, the optimal solution would be for the ROM team to work with and pass on knowledge that helps the unofficial developer and maybe even include him on the team if his work is good.

By the way, none of this is set in stone, so if anyone disagrees with the handling of the above scenario or anything in the revised rule, please provide feedback. We don't necessarily want to get too bogged down in minutiae, but we also want the rule to properly reflect what the community wants. Because in the end, XDA is the community and we are here to support each other.

that seems fair enough and makes total sense
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to BeansTown106 For This Useful Post: [ View ]
7th April 2017, 07:25 PM |#11  
MSF Jarvis's Avatar
Recognized Contributor
Flag Ghaziabad
Thanks Meter: 3,505
 
Donate to Me
More
Don't see any flaws in there. Great job!

Sent from my YUNIQUE using XDA Labs
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MSF Jarvis For This Useful Post: [ View ] Gift MSF Jarvis Ad-Free
Post Reply Subscribe to Thread

Guest Quick Reply (no urls or BBcode)
Message:
Previous Thread Next Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes