I have to say I'm in Paul's court on this one. We are all professional developers both for our own companies and our clients. There are time where a specific solution to a problem is not generally available and may be included in, planned for, or already in a beta commercial product - not shareware. The UT is fantastic in that we can and do help each other with approaches to problems, sharing information, identifying where to look and many times sharing code snippets that demonstrate solutions to common and not so common question. These snippets and our download files are not, however, commerical grade applications or classlibs. Many of us, include me, package our unique solutions in commerical apps and libraries. I am sure that most of us have retained ownership and source for 'common' things we put in client custom applications (compiled class w/o method source) just like we include VFP ocx (without developer LICs) so that the funcationality is presented and the invention is preserved. In the rare cases where we have had a client really really really want the source additional liciencing (and many more $$$) were involved.

In this case the functionality is shared and the invention/research has been preserved. I have used the driveInformation class and find it very useful and like many base level functions really have little interest in reinvention but rather building on it.

The developer community constantly walks the line between helping anyother learn to fish or just giving the fish. I think we are wll in this to become better fisherman. I for one am often encouraged to learn the a solution is even possible without any other details. It lets me know the search can be successful

Worked to long yesterday I guess - thats my comment.
Gary

>Jim,
>
>I'd like to set these things straight:
>The code I refused to "share" here on UT, makes more than 230 lines of code, not just "a few". In terms of worked time, around 40-60 hours. From these hours, about 90% were spent for research, not coding. There is also another reason I can't (not that I don't want to) make this code public: some users paid for using that code and it wouldn't be really fair to make it public (and free) now. Also: please notice that the class you reffer to is shareware software. That means anyone can use it as he/she likes and *ONLY* if he/she finds it useful it *CAN* be registred. That means it's already SHAREABLE. Not the code, but the posibility to use it. What do you want more? Do you want me (and everyone else here on UT) to work for free all the time?
>
>When somebody asks for code, there are 4 solutions:
>1. To give the code publicly;
>2. To send the code on private;
>3. To refuse the code;
>4. To not answer.
>
>I choosed the 3rd one. You don't know what reasons I had and I don't have to give any reasons.
>
>If you look back on UT, you will find many pieces of my code. Sometimes is the code I'm using, sometimes is code I wrote especially to answer to a question. Sometimes is good, sometimes is not so good. That's it. And sometimes I spent *A LOT* of time to make it work. Sometimes I have more time, I find an interesting question or I just want to give another part of my work to the others and I do it. Sometimes I don't. Why? Because this is what I want to do with what I own. And, please notice, this right it's *EXTREMLY* important to me. Other parts of my code can be found in the file section. Maybe it's not much, maybe it's not my best work, but that's it.
>
>Also, there is code that can't be published here because is under copyright to a client I've worked for. In these cases, I can tell (if I know:)) what's the solution (or what's not the solution), but I can't give code.
>
>Anyway, the other person in the thread you refered to understood that situation. Just for the record, my answer in that thread already gave the information I found after about 12-15 hours of searches and tests. I really don't think that anyone on UT has the right to judge how much and how each one contributes here.
>
>BTW, I never pushed "share it for all" aspect of UT. I just said "you can always ask here on UT". I'm sorry for my English, if it means the same thing, but I don't think so.
>
>Regards,
>Vlad
>
>>Paul,
>>
>>I see we swallowed our nasty pill again today!
>>
>>Yes, privacy *IS* wonderful. I took small issue with the person to whom I was responding, who on the one hand was pushing the "share it for all" aspect of UT yet on the other hand very recently refused to "share" a few lines of code with someone on the UT.
>>
>>I, as is my bent, saw some irony in it!
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Jim N
>>
>>>> And sometimes a person *HAS* worked it out and chooses *NOT* to share it on
>>>> the UT.
>>>
>>>Isn't "privacy" wonderful?
>>>
>>>(I wonder if MS would share with us the source code to VFP, so that we
>>>could all take a chunk, and fix any bugs that we might find. After all,
>>>this is usually how things are done on the Internet. )