The first reply stated that he can create one for anything but Windows. The reason being that
"The only reason 3rd party clients are allowed at all is to let people on other operating systems use slsk. 3rd party clients in general cause problems unless they are written very well as the developers don't have access to the protocol information and they have to hack it out."The message is that Soulseek and the protocol are both closed and top secret so to speak.
who's security? certainly not mine as sys-admin who gets to watch all those bug-ridden 3rd party client cause problems on his network.That's the problem with a proprietary, closed protocol such as Soulseek. Other people who wish to create clients, or maybe create better servers, are left out to dry. They must make due with half-assed protocol documentation because the SoulSeek people want to maintain control.
It clearly states in their Rules page that users are "encouraged" to use the official Windows client and clients for other platforms will be tolerated.
Users may not decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, or otherwise reduce the software to a human readable form. Users may not modify, adapt, translate, rent, lease, loan, resell for profit, distribute, or otherwise assign or transfer the software, or create derivitive works based upon the software or any part thereof. [From Rules page]Whatever happened to sharing? They are purposely crippling all other clients.
The programmer who asked about this, Synt4XX_3rr0R, seems like a smart guy. He listed most of the advantages of an open source client; The security, the ability to make it international, and the ability to extend the client. While there exist open source clients (written in Python for the most), they are unofficial and have been re-inventing the wheel when it comes to the protocol.
Synt4XX says that, "Personally, I know that the standart windows client is not very safe, I found several weaknesses .." and sierracat replies, "umm standard procedure in the software world is to report those bugs to the developers, either via the bugzilla or private email if it is a large security risk." That's another problem for closed source. The people using the software have to wait for the developers to fix the bugs. With open source, a developer could jump in and create a bug fix. Synt4XX himself could do it instead of saying there are problems.
Next, sierracat replies to Synt4XX's other point, "Opening the source of my client would allow to improve it more efficiently version by version ... (bug corrections, security improvements etc ...)" with one word: debatable. And I'm going to reply with: debatable my ass. Why is it that many companies are open-sourcing their software? Obviously there must be some advantage. The major databases in use, such as MySQL, PostgreSQL and BerkeleyDB, are open source and this begs the question...why not SoulSeek?
I say, let's boycott these bastards who have no sense of community until they let the code and the protocol information flow freely. I mean, what kind of a client says you need to uninstall other software before using it??
The boycott of SoulSeek has begun! Users for a free Internet, UNITE!
Note: I know that a boycott may not work, but it's still worth a shot. Send soulseek an email telling them to free the source here