Is it possible to list a paid app on Cydia using my own personal repo? If so, how? Or is my only option to submit to one of the well-known repos (such as BigBoss) and sell it through them? I'd rather not go through a third party if it can be avoided.
I've managed to successfully set up a free repo, so I'm familiar with the process in that regard.
The large repositories such as ModMyi and BigBoss work very closely with Saurik to manage paid packages. In order to host paid apps on your own repository, you'll need to get into contact with either him or his assistant, Britta.
Honestly, it's not practical to set up your own repository this way. There is really nothing to gain from hosting the paid packages yourself, except for instant updates. Having your package on one of the main repositories will make it much more available, and thus contribute to more sales. You also have the reliability of the main repositories, and won't have to go through the management yourself.
Related
If my entire project is stored in a public github repo what's to stop people from downloading it and publishing it on Google play before I do?
I want to use github to keep track of changes in a group Android project, I was told an active account would also benefit future employment, and make it public to help other students. But what if I wanted to eventually publish it to Google play? See the above question.
I'm new to software development.
If you find your code online somewhere which you did not permit or without your license, you can submit a DMCA claim. Here is Google Play's takedown form and GitHub's DMCA guide.
If you want to keep your code in a private repository, try BitBucket, it's a private code repository and free up to five users.
The meaning of a public github repository is specified by github as the following:
Public Repositories can be viewed and cloned by anyone. Choose this if your repository:
is an open source project
should be easy for other members to fork and contribute back their modifications.
I would be a better option to choose private repository(paid on) to keep your code safe.
Yes, you have the option Transfer ownership so you can transfer you code to your future employer using github. Hope it helps you. Let me know if you need any further information,
Transfer this repo to another user or to an organization where you have admin rights.
If my entire project is stored in a public github repo what's to stop people from downloading it and publishing it on google play before I do?
In theory, nothing.
In practice, few people are going to run across your repository, unless you promote it (e.g., publish links to it). There are many repositories in GitHub.
Any opensource project (such as a public github repo) needs to declare a software license. In the case of github, failing to do so implies a default MIT license to any fork (clone), which gives away most rights except attribution.
GPL licenses are viral, meaning any tier in a system that contains GPL code belongs to that GPL. All published code and changes must be published back up to the original repo. This seems more suited to your repo. That would include pull requests required to license an appclone, which you could block.
Google will pull any app that clearly violates a license, and right quickly too, since they have some liability to do so. Also, developers have been known to globally broadcast their displeasure when violated.
The boilerplate license types are fairly clear and bullet-proof, as long as you don't need to change them - for that you should seek legal counsel.
Most corporations stay away from anything not clearly licensed as MIT or weaker. You can get fired for pulling GPL code into (compromising the ownership of) a proprietary codebase. GPL is for educational and partnership arrangements.
So there is obviously a clear trade-off between repo license strength and number of active contributors. An unconditional license can attract contributors, a conditional license can orphan the repo. Business is about relationships.
GitHub has created a nice website to help people decide on a license: https://choosealicense.com/
The solution is to use a private repo. You can set anyone as a contributor with write access.
My company has a project where we need to share an SDK we have developed with initially a limited set of developers, but ultimately all developers, so that they can:
- download the SDK
- submit issues
- browse and post to a forum where other developers troubleshoot issues
- post reference clients that use the code which developers can download, contribute to...
Note: We don't want/need other developers to edit/contribute to the SDK itself. My company will retain control and edit/publish the SDK.
I am seeing sites like GitHub but I'm not sure it's the right fit. Could GitHub meet my needs? Are there other sites that might do this better?
Github provides private repositories for a fee. There's also Bitbucket which also does Git and is now part of the Attlassian suit it provides private repositories for free but the number of users is limited; LaunchPad does the same with Bazaar instead of Git, Microsoft has Codeplex and TFS on the azure cloud, and I'm sure there's a gaggle of providers for other version control platforms.
In short there are many, many options, one of them is sure to fit your needs and budget.
I'm going to be creating a few small mobile applications and have managed to find a great online Git repo hosting services that is free. It even comes with online issue tracking software but appears to be mainly geared towards the development team. I was hoping it would also have an interface for end-users to log issues/features and allow them to vote on what they wanted but it does not have this. It does expose an RESTful API but I didn't want to go down that path and wanted something ready to go (once configured).
I don't think I need it to be integrated with the Git repo so having something that is purely standalone would be great but I would definitely want something that is online as I don't want to install software on my local PC.
In summary, my requirements are:
Free or very cheap
Simple end-user interface to allow users
to submit issues/features
Allow end-users to vote on their own or other users issues/features
Visible status of issues/features (i.e. whether they are pending, in progress, rejected, fixed etc)
A more advanced management system for me as a developer to manage the
issues
Some basic reports/charts/graphing would be great
Email/RSS notification of new issues/suggestions would be great too
Something that is ready to go after some configuration/settings.
Can anyone recommend something that would be suitable for this?
TIA
I based my question on a website I saw a while back but couldn't find it. Anyway, I've now found it again (it's called http://www.uservoice.com/). It's not really issue tracking but more of a way of letting end-users report features and allow them to vote on them. The important thing is that it is a very user friendly interface which is perfect for end-users. Obviously, I would then need to maintain issues/features in my own system (e.g. Mantis) and then manually sync features requested in uservoice to Mantis but that shouldn't be a big issue. Anyway, this perfectly meets my needs for my low volume applications at the moment.
Ok, when hired on to my current company a year ago, I was tasked with migrating our development teams from VSS. They already had it in their minds that they wanted Subversion, and since I had experience using and setting up subversion, I was a good candidate. I first tried to sell TFS because it woul dhave solved the problem I am in right now, but since money is tight, and Subversion is free... well you get it. Anyway, I have finalized the propsal and the only thing standing in the way is the following.
I proposed that we store only our source code in SVN, and all documentation, release builds, and other project artifracts be stored in our SharePoint portal, so we don't have to give non developer stakeholders access to SVN. When I presented the proposal, all was excepted but the question arose about how to manage the syncronization between the artifacts (Ex: How to is document x version 3.1.2 associated with release 4.5.2). My initial reaction is to create a section in the SharePoint porject page for each new release that will hold the artificats (and keep track of changes too). Is there a better way of doing this? Does anyone know of anyone doing this? Or any integration packages to sync SVN with SharePoint?
Here is some info on the companies development environment. All of our software is for internal use, we sell none of it, so our customers are all in-house. We have 2 types of developers: 1. those who take care of maintainance and customization of third party software, and 2. those who write proprieatry software (which is where I fall). Our software we write is mostly .NET, but the 3rd party software is all over the board (COBAL, C, FORTRAN, Other crap that no ones cares about anymore).
Please advise, as I need to get this submitted soon. I HATE VSS!!!!!!!!!! and I need relief!
What we do internally is putting all docs under our version control system, I think it's much easier. Then, of course, you have to give access to not-developers.
In your case, using SVN, why don't you put everything inside and then use the webinterface to give access to the stakeholders? It's easy enough for them :-P
I would use SVN for both documents and source code.
Advantages:
You can synchronize versions of
documents with versions of source
code.
You have everything in one place, so
no two repositories to administrate.
Disadvantages:
You'd probably need to manage the
access rights for some stakeholders
to some parts of the folder
structures.
SVN is not the most appropriate tool
for document management
In order to solve the possible concurrent changes to the same document, you can use SVN property svn:needs-lock for these items, to make them editable by one person, who locks the item.
As pablo said, you can access the documents (at least for reading them) through the web interface.
You could expose the svn repo via the web interface and link to that in sharepoint. That way people who need to edit the documents would need access to subversion but anyone could easily access the documents "read only".
In our organization, we have docs/artifacts, code everything in SVN and have given access to non-technical stakeholders as well who use tortoise client.
however you can look at the following option
Option 1 : create a ASP.Net interface for non-technical users
You can build a simple web interface in ASP.net, configure that with a single user so you would not have to create separate users for all the nontechnical stakeholders and they would get access to the docs with proper version control, etc. you could look at sharpsvn for the implementation aspect. the disadvantage of this approach would be that you might have to invest some time in developing this app
Option 2 : ofcourse, create separate users for each non-developer stakeholder
This answer is probably too late for you implementation, but the simplest integration path may be to store the docs in SVN and then publish to Sharepoint with an svn-hook.
Build artifacts could be programatically published the same way from you build scripts.
You can upload docs to SharePoint using a simple POST
i.e.
http://blogs.msdn.com/rohitpuri/archive/2007/04/10/upload-download-file-to-from-wss-document-library-using-dav.aspx
Probably a little late, too, but I would avoid putting the documents in SVN if you have a SharePoint system setup. Though SVN does a fantastic job for source code, for document management it doesn't provide the ease-of-use of SharePoint. If you have it already setup and you are a primarily MS based network, SharePoint makes a lot of sense and can handle revision control for the MS based documentation much better than SVN.
Yes, you can manage access to SVN documents with a needs-lock, but chances are at some point you'll have a non-developer needing to access the documents. Explaining SVN to a non-developer, non-techie is not an easy thing.
Right now, I keep all of my projects on my laptop. I'm thinking that I shouldn't do this, but instead use a version control system and check them in/out from an external hosting repository (Google Code, SourceForge, etc). I see several benefits here - first, I don't have to worry about losing my code if my computer crashes and burns or my external HDD crashes and burns; second, I can share my code with the world and perhaps even get more help when I need it.
Is this a good idea? If so, what are some other project hosts that I should investigate (other than Google Code and SourceForge)?
Assembla is awesome.
EDIT: Yes, this is a good idea - I used to use a personal copy of Vault and found it was more than I cared to manage (in case my server went down or hard drive crashed - not only was it painful to worry about losing and backing up data, but the downtime). Of course, it doesn't hurt to have your own backup as well. Cover all your bases!
After losing some freelance work to a hard drive crash, I've become keen on the philosophy that "It doesn't exist until its in source control". As I don't want to necessarily share the source for my projects with the rest of the world, I pay for webhosting (using Dreamhost who have great deals on basic shared hosting and easy one-click installs for things like subversion) and store my data that way. They don't claim to be any sort of backup service, but all I really want is a second copy offsite somewhere.
If I do decide to share the code I can always make it public later. Do note that sourceforge does not allow private/personal projects, and Google Code forces you to license your code using an open source license. Both have some limitations on the number of projects you can create (and aren't really intended to store everybody and their brother's personal projects).
Assembla looks pretty slick although it is hard to tell what all you get for free. I'm definitely going to try it out.
There is an extensive list at wikipedia.
GitHub is a really great option for git.
Most of the free, public hosting sights will insist that you license your code with an OSS license (and, possibly, your documentation). That's potentially a different thing that you're talking about (backups).
For just backups, you may want to try a for-pay service or even something like mozy.
I use Assembla - You can share your code if you want, but you are not required to. That's a big plus to me.
Online backup is cheap and easy. Why would you not?
I host most of my non-code backups on Amazon's S3 service.
Code goes on a Slicehost virtual server that has automated snapshot backups (daily as well as weekly) and runs Subversion and the Trac web interface to it.
Github is a really great hosting service if you use Git; and of course everyone should use Git. The default is free public project hosting, but if your stuff is proprietary (or perhaps embarrassing) you can get private hosting from them for some cost per month.
If you want to make your projects in some form public, than a hosting-solution may be useful for you.
I made a listing of project-hosting-sites at this question. Of these list only Origo allows you also to host a closed-source-project. As long as you want to open up your source, you can choose everyone on this list.
For my personal projects I use a git repository on a local Fedora Server (that is backed up daily). I .tgz the repository and mysqldb (for bugzilla) and back it up on Carbonite AND a local, redundant hard drive.
I can clone the git repository from any of my other machines into all other environments.
With this you have a backup and version control. I think my system is better than the one I have at work, LOL.
As long as you want to publish your personal projects as open source, you have a lot of possibilities to choose from, because there are lots of hosters that provide this.
If you just want to store your code somewhere online, but not share it with the world:
Some hosters also allow private repositories, but the only free one that I know of is Bitbucket (which I use myself for my private and open source projects).
They allow an unlimited number of public and private Mercurial and Git repositories, the only limitation is that no more than five users can access your private repositories (you can have more, but then it's not free anymore).