Vuze is open source, so much so that today it has a fork that is implementing version 2 of the bittorrent protocol( https://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0052.html  ), fork called BiglyBT ( https://github.com/BiglySoftware/BiglyBT  ).
*Libtorrent is also implementing version 2 of the protocol, libtorrent which is used in qbittorrent, deluge and some other projects.

I usually try out different software before I (try to) settle on one. But I usually go for the FOSS ones since it has a sort of trust factor (although I have seen quite a few odd ones).
I believe there are more people like me who will try a software having decent FOSS alternatives only if its FOSS. (scuffed sentence)

So +1 to make it opensource so that it draws more audience. (I believe some comments above me have pointed about other advantages of going open source).

Hope to try this software out in the future :)

I've looked through a lot of these posts about open sourcing Tixati but I've never seen a comment from the developer for why he choose closed source. I'm asking why not to try to convince him. I'm just genuinely curious. If the forum moderators can get in contact with anyone that works on Tixati, and ask this question I think we would all really appreciate it.

I believe open sourcing will help:
- other can contribute and fix bugs allowing wider bandwidth than what the current developer can handle
- if the developer for some reason cesses development other can take over the development

I don't think that will make a difference. Even the GPL allows you to make exceptions for certain proprietary libraries. See https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs

> but I've never seen a comment from the developer for why he choose closed source.

The only reason I as a dev would leave my stuff closed-source is just cuz I copy-pasted a lot of code from everywhere and I don't want any DMCA's xD

but at least I hope there are multiple people in the Tixati team and it won't just one day stay forgotten forever, that's my fear with closed-source apps

The level of entitled, ungrateful, shameless and whiny behavior is off the charts in this thread. The dev does not "owe" you the source, no matter if you're a donor or not. All your other excuses, begging, downright insults and/or threats in order to somehow or the other extract the source from him is pathetic, to say the least. What a bunch of losers.

Since the dev has chosen deliberately (for almost a decade now) not to wade into this cesspool (and yet tolerates this thread), get a damn clue, y'all. Hats off to him for all his hard work, despite some real ungrateful inbred ingrates out there. If you don't trust closed source software, there are plenty of (crappy) alternatives out there, so don't let the door hit you on the way out. Buh-bye now!

>Hats off to him for all his hard work, despite some real ungrateful inbred ingrates out there. If you don't trust closed source software, there are plenty of (crappy) alternatives out there, so don't let the door hit you on the way out. Buh-bye now!

The dev can justify his own decision without some immature bootlicker slobbering on his nob. Attributing quality to close-source as if were intrinsic, a grand delusion rendered moot the second you bother learning how the lights in the modern tech world stay on.

wow a lot of arguments going back years on this thread.

Well consider this; right now under KH's control, any version of Tixati you find is definitely released by him (and Janet?)

Since KH devised Tixati; he has declared it to be efficient and malware/adware free. Those who appreciate the software can donate.


If KH released the source code, those of malicious intent would instantly recompile with malware and/or hide adware and you would have no trust whatsoever.
Tixati already comes with a promise of no surreptitious coin-mining or invasive adware like utorrent ended up. That is the reason why so many still use ancient versions of utorrent.

With open-source, so many forks would appear, features would probably get broken with bugs and not get fixed. There is hardly any community activity here let alone for various software forks of Tixati?

Bad actors would make versions that download but never upload which only harms the P2P ecosystem or could create spying versions who report users to the thoroughly dishonest copyright mafiaa.

It's an informed choice offering. Take it or leave it I guess. Choose to take part or choose not to.

Tixati is one of those projects where everyone's opinion counts so please always keep contributing.

"The dev can justify his own decision without some immature bootlicker slobbering on his nob."

He doesn't need to, which is something a-holes like you simply cannot seem to get into your numbskulls. Don't like it, go code your own damn client and open source it. No-one's gonna hold their breath waiting.

I know about existence of Tixati for years.
The idea is great. Software itself is probably too.
But it's not open source.
It's ridiculous that somebody can claim such things as "NO Spyware" and everything else about their proprietary software.
So i am not using it.

Every software is open source, if you can read assembly!

Sometimes tixati has bugs or crashes with various libraries, though, and it's unreasonable to expect a single person or small group to perfectly maintain stability on so many different software ecosystems, so I think that's kind of where open source shines, for supporting those more niche communities or edge cases where someone gets a crash in something and can just... fix it themselves, and submit the patch upstream. But then, I'm sure there's downsides, like the endless stream of people complaining that you did it wrong because that's not how they would have programmed that, or something.

Though, the fears about recompiling or code quality or whatever are... non issues, categorically, as there is no structure for them to have meaningful place. You can inject malicious code into closed source software just as easily, and if you get Tixati from official sources, it will always be compiled to the standards of the source you get it from, such as this website. It's not like someone can suddenly maliciously upload code freely to the "master" version of which only one can ever exist and all other downloads are derived or something silly like that.
I think it's fine to be closed source or open source, it's just different ways of doing things with ups and downs, but fud about hackers or whatever isn't real. it's just a very different way of doing things, with potential hangups with having to manage code under a possibly restrictive license and have to think about all the ways people can and can't use your code legally, rather than just making a program and sharing it.