Image 01


Alain Gibaud

Developers Apps by azhyd 14 comments

PiKlab has begun as a verbatim copy of PiKdev,
which I created from scratch several years ago
and maintained/improved during all this time.

Technically speaking, Nicolas Hadacek has realized
a fork of my program, which is published under GPL license.
He has never proposed any contribution to my program,
but just copy all the sources, icons, principles, and various
files such as syntax highlight file.
He has modified many files to satisfy his own taste about
programming style, reorganize code, or to include code getted from various sources
(his own production, or from lplab project: see

As piklab has been realized without any discussion with me,
(I discover it some weeks ago)
I consider this behaviour very unfriendly, and a waste of energy
because it leads to develop two programs with same purposes
and very close interfaces.
I would like to be very clear: the problem is not to reuse code,
but to reuse it to release a *really* very similar software.
(Just have a look at screenshots to understand what I mean).
It would has been simpler and more efficient to propose improvements, but I suppose it was
not enough for Mr Hadacek's ego, which is now the "author" of something.

I dropped him emails and explained my mind. I supposed that,
after having loot my code (v0.8.0) to build piklab v0.2,
Mr Hadacek will create by his own, but I was wrong:
I now discover this sentence in piklab v0.3 changelog :

"incorporate some fixes from pikdev 0.8.2"

this is quite clear: Mr Hadacek continue to pick what he
needs in my code (as I just released version 0.8.4, so 0.8.2 was the most recent
version when piklab 0.3 has been released).
Any bug in programming engine?
No problem, he just have to get fixes, and continue
to claim to "support" internal programmer.

Obviously a fork means a separation in two independant branches,
but Mr Hadacek approach of fork is quite easy for him,
I feel this approach intellectualy dishonest.

I am tired by such a silly guy.

Author of PiKdev - Feb 08 2006

Developers Apps by lagaleck 9 comments

Sorry, I did not see it.

Please see my previous response.

Alain - Jan 30 2006

Developers Apps by lagaleck 9 comments

Many reasons:

a) Too much work, if not done from scratch

b) Users really not need "sophisticated" features like CVS,
installation options, configure automake autoconf and all these stuffs.
From my experience, users are often electronic hobbyist that are not concerned by too sophisticated tools,
and are easily confused.

c) Anyway by reusing Kate, PiKdev already gains a lot of benefits from KDE framework. Not so bad. It has been rather difficult due to the lack of documentation. I had to read KWrite and Kate source code to understand something.
I really do not want to have the same trouble with Kdevelop.

Alain - Jan 30 2006

Developers Apps by lagaleck 9 comments

pic comes from microchip and I replaced C with K because my IDE is a KDE app.

Nothing else.

Alain - Apr 08 2004