@dansup If someone wants to redo what your camera does, they will eventually find a way regardless of you open sourcing it or not!

publishing different builds to what your open source code is has multiple drawbacks:

* no replicable builds: we as a community never can be sure what you push to the store
* the release process gets over-complicated for you too, because you need to bring in the different camera into the OSS code locally for each release

@dansup I was kind of hoping for reproducible builds down the line, with a setup like this that won't be happening sadly :/

@dansup I figure clones will always happen, but you don’t want to _accelerate_ them with your own work for sure; and particularly while you’re launching.
Perhaps you could start by open sourcing your code N months delayed, (but publishing all the hashes between now and then, to demonstrate honesty). As Loops gains visibility & prestige (so clones are less damaging), you could reduce the delay time.
(This would probably work best if your camera work is a totally separate repo!)

@dansup someone will always copy open source code which has gotten a degree of visibility. That should make you proud, not worried. At least that is how i see it.

@dansup I would say if you truly feel uncomfortable but still feel torn, open source it but delay the release of that specific code

But also want to say that open source is the mycelium of software and most of the code we all benefit from is code that people put there life's essence into. You would be adding to that and having people use that code shows the value of that code. If it is truly valuable it will become part of that foundation.

@dansup Do you use Open Source libraries in the software you build? Often libraries that did not exist until someone published them.

It feels like somewhat against the very spirit of open protocols and collaboration to be considering publishing something like that closed source, pulling the ladder up as it were.