@joehillen

I'm not sure why you think it's OK to come onto this forum and say that we are

But I suspect it is that you don't have the faintest idea about the nature of this project, or about us.

You certainly haven't read the copious comments from us here where we explain that there are technical and legal reasons why we haven't released the code to Open Source.

But, more than that, we have found that there are significantly more people that simply want to be able to download and install Lightworks on the Windows, Linux and OS X platforms than there are developers who want to get their hands on the source code (significant though that number is). So, rather than ignoring our potential users, we're actually responding to the actual demand, which is for a version that can be easily used, is written by us, and which we and the community can support.

And, in case you hadn't noticed, we're making this available for nothing, unless users want to upgrade to stuff that we can't give away anyway, or they wish to contribute to the project, which, you may not be aware, we have, and will continue to fund, ourselves.

We have set out our 4-stage map towards open source, and, in reaching that, the only agenda we will follow is the one that we consider to be the best way to get Lightworks used and loved by the maximum possible number of users.

Alright, I've got my answer. Arrogant.

Best of luck to you.

Everything you've written here suggests that you have completely misunderstood the nature of this project. I also have to say that if anyone's arrogant about this it's you. Any more troll-like responses from you will not be allowed on this forum.

Just to be clear:

Of course users want software that's written by us at this stage. Is there anyone other than the original developers of Lightworks, and the best of developers that have moved across to us from other products, who are better placed to move Lightworks forward? Of course there are great Open Source developers out there, but they would be working from a standing start.

This is a specialist and complex product. We are not going to release it to Open Source until it is ready. Do to otherwise would cause untold issues.

I love the way some newbys come staight into the forum so full of confidence with an 'I know best' attitude.

It reminds me of a story told by 19th Century free settlers who took up 'selections' in the remote Australian bush: It was said that once a fellow had felled his trees, split his slabs, built his hut, sunk his well and dug his 'privvy', he became a great neighbour!

It seems to me that all these new "neighbours" only idea for contribution is to hook Lightworks up with ffmpeg or similar and they'll do it for free, all of them. If that's the only idea for contribution to an open source version, then it might be better to not release it at all. To choose from a plethora of the same with varying level of quality of the code isn't going to help anyone.

Anyone for something more useful, an "auto-edit" feature for example?

joehillen wrote:


The only arrogant one is you. You come here and demand something from the Developers and even tell them what he has to do with his software ? You don't even have the courtesy to buy a Pro license to support the developers but demand the source code for free ?

Are you out of your fricking mind ? Lightworks is no Open-Source. Period. So why should they give anything to you ?

You are a the best example what is so wrong with the Open-Source community.