Search Results

Search found 101632 results on 4066 pages for 'source code'.

Page 7/4066 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

• Should we exclude code for the code coverage analysis?

  - by romaintaz

  I'm working on several applications, mainly legacy ones. Currently, their code coverage is quite low: generally between 10 and 50%. Since several weeks, we have recurrent discussions with the Bangalore teams (main part of the development is made offshore in India) regarding the exclusions of packages or classes for Cobertura (our code coverage tool, even if we are currently migrating to JaCoCo). Their point of view is the following: as they will not write any unit tests on some layers of the application (1), these layers should be simply excluded from the code coverage measure. In others words, they want to limit the code coverage measure to the code that is tested or should be tested. Also, when they work on unit test for a complex class, the benefits - purely in term of code coverage - will be unnoticed due in a large application. Reducing the scope of the code coverage will make this kind of effort more visible... The interest of this approach is that we will have a code coverage measure that indicates the current status of the part of the application we consider as testable. However, my point of view is that we are somehow faking the figures. This solution is an easy way to reach higher level of code coverage without any effort. Another point that bothers me is the following: if we show a coverage increase from one week to another, how can we tell if this good news is due to the good work of the developers, or simply due to new exclusions? In addition, we will not be able to know exactly what is considered in the code coverage measure. For example, if I have a 10,000 lines of code application with 40% of code coverage, I can deduct that 40% of my code base is tested (2). But what happen if we set exclusions? If the code coverage is now 60%, what can I deduct exactly? That 60% of my "important" code base is tested? How can I As far as I am concerned, I prefer to keep the "real" code coverage value, even if we can't be cheerful about it. In addition, thanks to Sonar, we can easily navigate in our code base and know, for any module / package / class, its own code coverage. But of course, the global code coverage will still be low. What is your opinion on that subject? How do you do on your projects? Thanks. (1) These layers are generally related to the UI / Java beans, etc. (2) I know that's not true. In fact, it only means that 40% of my code base

  Read the article

• How to share code as open source?

  - by Ethel Evans

  I have a little program that I wrote for a local group to handle a somewhat complicated scheduling issue for scheduling multiple meetings in multiple locations that change weekly according to certain criteria. It's a niche need, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are other groups that could use software like this. In fact, we've had requests from others for directions on starting a group like this, and if their groups get as big, they might also want special software to help with scheduling. I plan to continue developing the program and eventually make it an online web app, but a very simple alpha version is completed as a console app. I'd like to make it available as open source, but I have no idea what kind of process I should go through first. Right now, all I have is Java code, not even unit-tested thoroughly. I haven't shown the code to anyone else. There is no documentation. I don't know where I would put the code so others could access it. I don't know anything about licensing it. I don't know what kind of support people will expect from me if I release it as open source. I have no idea what else I should worry about. Can someone outline for me (or post an article(s) that outlines) the process of taking open source software from "coded" to "completed / available"? I really don't want to embarrass myself by doing things weirdly.

  Read the article

• Which Open Source Licenses can address concerns for an Open Source Game Engine?

  - by Chris

  I am on a team that is looking to open source an engine we are building. It's intended as an engine for Online RPG style games. We're writing it to work on both desktops and android platforms. I've been over to the OSI http://opensource.org/licenses/category to check out the most common licenses. However, this will be my first time going into an open source project and I wanted to know if the community had some insight into which licenses might be best suited. Key licensing concerns: Removing or limiting our liability (most already seem to cover this, but stating for completeness). We want other developers to be able to take part or all of our project and use it in their own projects with proper accreditation to our project. Licensing should not hinder someone's ability to quickly use the engine. They should be able to download a release and start using it without needing to wait on licensing issues. Game content (gfx, sound, etc.) that is not part of the engine should be allowed to be licensed separately. If someone is using our engine, they can retain full copy right of their content, including engine generated data. Our primary goal is exposure, which is why we're going open source to start with. Both for the project and for the individuals developing it. Are there any licenses that can require accreditation visible to players? While I'd put our primary goal as exposure, for licensing the accreditation is less of a concern. From what I've read through (and have been able to understand) it doesn't seem like any of the licenses cover anything that is produced by the licensed software. Are there any that state this specifically, or does simply not mentioning it leave it open for other licensing? Are there any other concerns that we should consider? Has anyone had any issues using any of these licenses?

  Read the article

• Developer momentum on open source projects

  - by sashang

  Hi I've been struggling to develop momentum contributing to open source projects. I have in the past tried with gcc and contributed a fix to libstdc++ but it was a once off and even though I spent months in my spare time on the dev mailing list and reading through things I just never seemed to develop any momentum with the code. Eventually I unsubscribed and got my free time back and uncluttered my mailbox. Like a lot of people I have some little open source defunct projects lying around on the net, but they're not large and I'm the only contributor. At the moment I'm more interested in contributing to a large open source project and want to know how people got started because I find it difficult while working full time to develop any momentum with the code base. Other more regular contributors, who are on the project full-time, are able to make changes at will and as result enter that positive feedback cycle where they understand the code and also know where it's heading. It makes the barrier to entry higher for those that come along later. My questions are to people who actively contribute to large opensource projects, like the Linux kernel, or gcc or clang/llvm or anything else with say a developer head count of more than 10. How did you get started? Was there a large chunk of time in your life that you just could dedicate to working on the project? I know in Linus's case he had a chunk of time (6 months) to get it started. What barriers to entry did you encounter? Can you describe the initial stages of the time spent with the project, from when you had little understanding of the code to when you understood enough to commit regularly. Thanks

  Read the article

• Is my concept in open source license correct?

  - by tester

  I would like to justify whether my concept in the open source license is correct, as you know that, misunderstanding the terms may lead to a serious law sue. Thank you. The main difference among the open source license is whether the license is copyleft. Copyleft license means allow the others to reproduce, modify and distribute the products but the released product is bound by the same licensing restriction. That means they have to use the same license for the modified version. Also, the copyleft license require all the released modified version to be free software. On the other hand, if any others create derived work incorporating non-copyleft licensed code, they can choose any license for the code. The serveral kinds of license and comparsion GPL is a restrictive license. Software requires to released as GPL license if that integrate or is modified from the other GPL license software . The library used in developing GPL license software are also restricted to GPL and LGPL , proprietary software are not allowed to employ (or complied with) in any part of the GPL application. LGPL is similar to GPL , but was more permissive with regarding allow the using of other non-GPL software. BSD is relatively simple license, it allow developer to do anything on the original source code . The license holder do not hold any legal responsibilities for their released product. Apache license is evolved from the BSD license. The legal terms are improved and are written by legal professionals in a more modern way. It covers comprehensive intellectual property ownership and liability issues. Also, are there any popular license beside these? Thank you

  Read the article

• Developing momentum on open source projects

  - by sashang

  Hi I've been struggling to develop momentum contributing to open source projects. I have in the past tried with gcc and contributed a fix to libstdc++ but it was a once off and even though I spent months in my spare time on the dev mailing list and reading through things I just never seemed to develop any momentum with the code. Eventually I unsubscribed and got my free time back and uncluttered my mailbox. Like a lot of people I have some little open source defunct projects lying around on the net, but they're not large and I'm the only contributor. At the moment I'm more interested in contributing to a large open source project and want to know how people got started because I find it difficult while working full time to develop any momentum with the code base. Other more regular contributors, who are on the project full-time, are able to make changes at will and as result enter that positive feedback cycle where they understand the code and also know where it's heading. It makes the barrier to entry higher for those that come along later. My questions are to people who actively contribute to large opensource projects, like the Linux kernel, or gcc or clang/llvm or anything else with say a developer head count of more than 10. How did you get started? Was there a large chunk of time in your life that you just could dedicate to working on the project? I know in Linus's case he had a chunk of time (6 months) to get it started. What barriers to entry did you encounter? Can you describe the initial stages of the time spent with the project, from when you had little understanding of the code to when you understood enough to commit regularly. Thanks

  Read the article

• Selling an open source project: some issues

  - by Sander

  I am the creator / main developer of a small sized open source (PHP) project (GPL3). Currently there is a development team of 3 people (me included). This team has been quite active for some time, but since almost 2 years not much has happened. I myself have decided I want to stop working on the project, but I can't just leave the project because I care about it and I know if I abandon it, it will just be a matter of time before the project completely dies. At this moment, there are still some users and the project is only slightly out-of-date. So I'm thinking about selling the whole project. Of course I'd need to get consent of the other developers, but for now I'm assuming that's not a big problem. So at this moment I have 2 questions: 1) If the project would be sold to a commercial party, would it be possible for them to convert the project to closed source? I would prefer to sell the project to a company/organization that would continue the development under an open source license. 2) Does anyone have any tips to find interested parties? I don't know if I just want to put up a "For Sale" sign on the website of the project. Maybe someone has experience with a comparable situation. Ok guys, thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• What is a correct/polite way to inherit from an abandoned open-source project for a new open-source project?

  - by Kabumbus

  My team just tried to contact some guys from an old open source project hosted on code.google.com. We told them that we'd like to join their project and commit to it — at least to some branch of it — but no one responded to us. We tried everyone, owners and committers; no one was in any way active, and no one replied. But we have some code to commit and we really would love to continue work on that project. So we need to create a new project. We came up with a name for it which is close to but not a duplicate of the name of the project we want to inherit from. How should we do our first commit, and what should the commit message be? Should we just copy their code to our repository with a comment like "we inherited this code, we found it here under such and such a license ... now we're upgrading it to this more/less strict license ..."? Or should we just use their code as our first commit, with updates saying "we inherited from ... we made such and such changes ..."?

  Read the article

• How to promote an open-source project?

  - by Shehi

  First of all, I apologize if this is the wrong section of network to post this question. If it is, please feel free to move it to more appropriate location... Question: I would like to hear your ideas regarding the ways of open source projects being started and run. I have an open-source content management system project and here some questions arise: How should I act? Shall I come up with a viable pre-alpha edition with working front- and back-ends first and then announce the project publicly? Or shall I announce it right away from the scratch? As a developer I know that one should use versioning system like Git or SVN, which I do, no problems there. And the merit of unit-testing is also something to remember, which, to be frank, I am not into at all... Project management - I am a beginner in that, at best. Coding techniques and experiences such as Agile development is something I want to explore... In short, any ideas for a developer who is new to open-source world, is most welcome.

  Read the article

• Developing my momentum on open source projects

  - by sashang

  Hi I've been struggling to develop momentum contributing to open source projects. I have in the past tried with gcc and contributed a fix to libstdc++ but it was a once off and even though I spent months in my spare time on the dev mailing list and reading through things I just never seemed to develop any momentum with the code. Eventually I unsubscribed and got my free time back and uncluttered my mailbox. Like a lot of people I have some little open source defunct projects lying around on the net, but they're not large and I'm the only contributor. At the moment I'm more interested in contributing to a large open source project and want to know how people got started because I find it difficult while working full time to develop any momentum with the code base. Other more regular contributors, who are on the project full-time, are able to make changes at will and as result enter that positive feedback cycle where they understand the code and also know where it's heading. It makes the barrier to entry higher for those that come along later. My questions are to people who actively contribute to large opensource projects, like the Linux kernel, or gcc or clang/llvm or anything else with say a developer head count of more than 10. How did you get started? Was there a large chunk of time in your life that you just could dedicate to working on the project? I know in Linus's case he had a chunk of time (6 months) to get it started. What barriers to entry did you encounter? Can you describe the initial stages of the time spent with the project, from when you had little understanding of the code to when you understood enough to commit regularly. Thanks

  Read the article

• How to set up source control in VS2010

  - by Jouke van der Maas

  Hi, I want to set up source control for my project, but it seems like I need a server for this. I've never done this before, and I couldn't find anything helpfull yet. Is there any way to host a server locally so Visual studio can use it? Or do you know any online (free) servers I can use? By the way, if source control is not actually what i should use for keeping track of changes in my files, please suggest a better option. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• MySQL 5.5

  - by trond-arne.undheim

  New performance and scalability enhancements, continued Investment in MySQL (see press release). "The latest release of MySQL further exemplifies Oracle's commitment to the MySQL community and investment in delivering rapid innovation and enhancements to the MySQL platform" said Edward Screven, Oracle's Chief Corporate Architect. MySQL is integral to Oracle's complete, open and integrated strategy. The MySQL 5.5 Community Edition, which is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), and is available for free download, includes InnoDB as the default storage engine. We cannot stress the importance of using open standards enough, whether in the context of open source or non-open source software. For more on Oracle's Open Source offering, see Oracle.com/opensource or oss.oracle.com (for developers).

  Read the article

• Code Metrics: Number of IL Instructions

  - by DigiMortal

  In my previous posting about code metrics I introduced how to measure LoC (Lines of Code) in .NET applications. Now let’s take a step further and let’s take a look how to measure compiled code. This way we can somehow have a picture about what compiler produces. In this posting I will introduce you code metric called number of IL instructions. NB! Number of IL instructions is not something you can use to measure productivity of your team. If you want to get better idea about the context of this metric and LoC then please read my first posting about LoC. What are IL instructions? When code written in some .NET Framework language is compiled then compiler produces assemblies that contain byte code. These assemblies are executed later by Common Language Runtime (CLR) that is code execution engine of .NET Framework. The byte code is called Intermediate Language (IL) – this is more common language than C# and VB.NET by example. You can use ILDasm tool to convert assemblies to IL assembler so you can read them. As IL instructions are building blocks of all .NET Framework binary code these instructions are smaller and highly general – we don’t want very rich low level language because it executes slower than more general language. For every method or property call in some .NET Framework language corresponds set of IL instructions. There is no 1:1 relationship between line in high level language and line in IL assembler. There are more IL instructions than lines in C# code by example. How much instructions there are? I have no common answer because it really depends on your code. Here you can see some metrics from my current community project that is developed on SharePoint Server 2007. As average I have about 7 IL instructions per line of code. This is not metric you should use, it is just illustrative example so you can see the differences between numbers of lines and IL instructions. Why should I measure the number of IL instructions? Just take a look at chart above. Compiler does something that you cannot see – it compiles your code to IL. This is not intuitive process because you usually cannot say what is exactly the end result. You know it at greater plain but you don’t know it exactly. Therefore we can expect some surprises and that’s why we should measure the number of IL instructions. By example, you may find better solution for some method in your source code. It looks nice, it works nice and everything seems to be okay. But on server under load your fix may be way slower than previous code. Although you minimized the number of lines of code it ended up with increasing the number of IL instructions. How to measure the number of IL instructions? My choice is NDepend because Visual Studio is not able to measure this metric. Steps to make are easy. Open your NDepend project or create new and add all your application assemblies to project (you can also add Visual Studio solution to project). Run project analysis and wait until it is done. You can see over-all stats form global summary window. This is the same window I used to read the LoC and the number of IL instructions metrics for my chart. Meanwhile I made some changes to my code (enabled advanced caching for events and event registrations module) and then I ran code analysis again to get results for this section of this posting. NDepend is also able to tell you exactly what parts of code have problematically much IL instructions. The code quality section of CQL Query Explorer shows you how much problems there are with members in analyzed code. If you click on the line Methods too big (NbILInstructions) you can see all the problematic members of classes in CQL Explorer shown in image on right. In my case if have 10 methods that are too big and two of them have horrible number of IL instructions – just take a look at first two methods in this TOP10. Also note the query box. NDepend has easy and SQL-like query language to query code analysis results. You can modify these queries if you like and also you can define your own ones if default set is not enough for you. What is good result? As you can see from query window then the number of IL instructions per member should have maximally 200 IL instructions. Of course, like always, the less instructions you have, the better performing code you have. I don’t mean here little differences but big ones. By example, take a look at my first method in warnings list. The number of IL instructions it has is huge. And believe me – this method looks awful. Conclusion The number of IL instructions is useful metric when optimizing your code. For analyzing code at general level to find out too long methods you can use the number of LoC metric because it is more intuitive for you and you can therefore handle the situation more easily. Also you can use NDepend as code metrics tool because it has a lot of metrics to offer.

  Read the article

• How do you get positive criticism on your code?

  - by burnt1ce

  My team rarely does code review, mainly because we don't have enough time and people lack the energy and will to do so. But I would really like to know what people think about my code when they read it. This way, I have a better understanding how other people think and tailor my code accordingly so it's easier to read. So my question is, how do I get positive criticism on my code? My intent is to understand how people think so I can write more readable code.

  Read the article

• How can you get constructive criticism for your code?

  - by burnt1ce

  My team rarely does code review, mainly because we don't have enough time and people lack the energy and will to do so. But I would really like to know what people think about my code when they read it. This way, I have a better understanding how other people think and tailor my code accordingly so it's easier to read. So my question is, how can I get constructive criticism for my code? My intent is to understand how people think so I can write more readable code.

  Read the article

• Building TrueCrypt on Ubuntu 13.10

  - by linuxubuntu

  With the whole NSA thing people tried to re-build identically looking binaries to the ones which truecrypt.org provides, but didn't succeed. So some think they might be compiled with back-doors which are not in the source code. - So how compile on the latest Ubuntu version (I'm using UbuntuGNOME but that shouldn't matter)? I tried some tutorials for previous Ubuntu versions but they seem not to work any-more? edit: https://madiba.encs.concordia.ca/~x_decarn/truecrypt-binaries-analysis/ Now you might think "ok, we don't need to build", but: To build he used closed-source software and there are proof-of-concepts where a compromised compiler still put backdoors into the binary: 1. source without backdoors 2. binary identically to the reference-binary 3. binary contains still backdoors

  Read the article

• GPL'ing code of a third party?

  - by Mark

  I am facing the following dilemma at the moment. I am using code from a scientific paper in a commercial project. So basically I copied and pasted the code from the paper's pdf into my code editor and use it in my own code. The code in the paper does not have any copy restrictions or license(like the GPL) so I thought I would be ok using it in a commercial project. However, I have seen several gpl licensed open source projects that use the exact same code from the paper to the point of having the same variable names like in the paper. So what happened here is that a gpl license was put on a third parties non gpl'ed code. Are these open source projects in violation of the gpl or would I be in violation of the gpl because I use code which has been gpl'ed? My common sense tells me it is not allowed to gpl somebody elses non-gpl'ed (like in this case from the paper) code but I though I would ask anyway.

  Read the article

• Webinar: SQL Source Control 3.0 Connect your existing source control system to SQL Server

  Find out what SQL Source Control & SQL Compare can do for your database development and deployment processes at one of our free weekly webinars. Each webinar includes a 30 minute software demonstration and a Q&A session. The Future of SQL Server Monitoring "Being web-based, SQL Monitor enables you to check on your servers from almost any location" Jonathan Allen.Try SQL Monitor now.

  Read the article

• Putting a versioned-but-not-via-source control project in source control

  - by Emilio

  I have some old code (an old but still maintained VB6 application) that from a source control point of view is the ultimate example of the plumber's plumbing (or cobbler's shoes). It's been version controlled by the approach of making a new directory for each version. Are there any major downsides to taking the following approach? Do the initial check-in of all files Erase all files from the working directory, then copy all files from the next version to the working directory Check them in Goto #2 until done Note that I have a general change log text file which I'd grab the comments from for each version I check in/commit. I don't have (or really care about at this point) comments on a per-file- basis. I don't really know at this point what files have changed between versions, and being lazy I figured I could avoid doing file compares between versions to find out, so that's why I'm taking the approach above. Not to mention that erasing all the files first allows file deletions to be detected. I specifically haven't mentioned which version control tool I'm using since I'm hoping (also assuming, but maybe very incorrectly) that the answer is fairly independent. When I use terms like "check-in" I use them in the general sense, not specific to a tool.

  Read the article

• Looking for free source code browser

  - by jsshah

  I use sourceInsight at work however at home I do not want to pay the price of $250 for source code browser Can you recommend a good source code browser Thanks --Jatin

  Read the article

• Open source engagement as a professional reference

  - by Martin

  if one commits his or her time to an open source project, he or she may be invest a substantial amount of time without getting paid. As much as altruism is appreciable, I wonder whether it "counts" as an activity which can be shown and is valued in job applications. If the company is worth your time and working power, which it should be in my honest opinion. So I wonder whether there is something like a common practice in open source projects for this matters. Say, something like Mr. Martin has been working on our project for five years and has contributed this and that,[...] I we wish him very best for his future. Mr. ChiefofProject I think this is a just concern. Do have experiences you can share?

  Read the article

• Most popular Open-Source License on github?

  - by John R

  This is a two part question: 1) What is the most popular Open-Source License used by developers on github? 2) Assuming people follow the rules - will this license (the most popular on github) assure that my name is always associated with the project - regardless of how it forks or is picked up elsewhere. The reason I ask is I have not yet used github nor released an open source project. My main incentive for releasing a particular project is to develop a name for myself and improve my resume. I have a lot of reading to do, but I suspect that knowing the most popular licensing schemes will reduce my reading and my learning curve.

  Read the article

• Odd company release cycle: Go Distributed Source Control?

  - by MrLane

  sorry about this long post, but I think it is worth it! I have just started with a small .NET shop that operates quite a bit differently to other places that I have worked. Unlike any of my previous positions, the software written here is targetted at multiple customers and not every customer gets the latest release of the software at the same time. As such, there is no "current production version." When a customer does get an update, they also get all of the features added to he software since their last update, which could be a long time ago. The software is highly configurable and features can be turned on and off: so called "feature toggles." Release cycles are very tight here, in fact they are not on a shedule: when a feature is complete the software is deployed to the relevant customer. The team only last year moved from Visual Source Safe to Team Foundation Server. The problem is they still use TFS as if it were VSS and enforce Checkout locks on a single code branch. Whenever a bug fix gets put out into the field (even for a single customer) they simply build whatever is in TFS, test the bug was fixed and deploy to the customer! (Myself coming from a pharma and medical devices software background this is unbeliveable!). The result is that half baked dev code gets put into production without being even tested. Bugs are always slipping into release builds, but often a customer who just got a build will not see these bugs if they don't use the feature the bug is in. The director knows this is a problem as the company is starting to grow all of a sudden with some big clients coming on board and more smaller ones. I have been asked to look at source control options in order to eliminate deploying of buggy or unfinished code but to not sacrifice the somewhat asyncronous nature of the teams releases. I have used VSS, TFS, SVN and Bazaar in my career, but TFS is where most of my experience has been. Previously most teams I have worked with use a two or three branch solution of Dev-Test-Prod, where for a month developers work directly in Dev and then changes are merged to Test then Prod, or promoted "when its done" rather than on a fixed cycle. Automated builds were used, using either Cruise Control or Team Build. In my previous job Bazaar was used sitting on top of SVN: devs worked in their own small feature branches then pushed their changes to SVN (which was tied into TeamCity). This was nice in that it was easy to isolate changes and share them with other peoples branches. With both of these models there was a central dev and prod (and sometimes test) branch through which code was pushed (and labels were used to mark builds in prod from which releases were made...and these were made into branches for bug fixes to releases and merged back to dev). This doesn't really suit the way of working here, however: there is no order to when various features will be released, they get pushed when they are complete. With this requirement the "continuous integration" approach as I see it breaks down. To get a new feature out with continuous integration it has to be pushed via dev-test-prod and that will capture any unfinished work in dev. I am thinking that to overcome this we should go down a heavily feature branched model with NO dev-test-prod branches, rather the source should exist as a series of feature branches which when development work is complete are locked, tested, fixed, locked, tested and then released. Other feature branches can grab changes from other branches when they need/want, so eventually all changes get absorbed into everyone elses. This fits very much down a pure Bazaar model from what I experienced at my last job. As flexible as this sounds it just seems odd to not have a dev trunk or prod branch somewhere, and I am worried about branches forking never to re-integrate, or small late changes made that never get pulled across to other branches and developers complaining about merge disasters... What are peoples thoughts on this? A second final question: I am somewhat confused about the exact definition of distributed source control: some people seem to suggest it is about just not having a central repository like TFS or SVN, some say it is about being disconnected (SVN is 90% disconnected and TFS has a perfectly functional offline mode) and others say it is about Feature Branching and ease of merging between branches with no parent-child relationship (TFS also has baseless merging!). Perhaps this is a second question!

  Read the article

• Open Source Client-Based Project Management?

  - by Chuck

  For quite some time I've been searching for a web-based, open-source project management program that I can run on my rented space at Dreamhost to track client projects. dotProject seems nice, but I've never figured out how to create projects that only certain people can access. I'm usually working on two or three projects at a time for different clients, and would like to be able to allow access for each client to their project but not others. So, first of all, can anyone point me to how to do this in dotProject, and baring that, can anyone recommend an open-source solution to this problem?

  Read the article

• Open source projects, how to choose?!

  - by Dhaivat Pandya

  I would like to join an open source project since I think I am good enough at programming to progress onto reading others code and to modify it. But the proble mis, how would I choose an open source project to work on? I know many languages and chief ones that I am good are python, C++ (not really very good at C, the lack of object orientation is difficult for me) and Java. For c++, I am proficient wit Qt. I would like to start with something that isn't huge, and hasn't reached a phase where the bugs are so complicated it would take me a month to understand what affects the bug. Any suggestions? At the current time, I don't use any libraries in either of the mentioned libraries that I would need to modify (AFAIK).

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >