I am aware of this. But I also know that an IDE with GUI toolkit is also a bit of a lock in. Did nobody learned what that means. The best example was Xojo.
Xojo locks you in because it writes proprietary text files that only its IDE understands and uses
And because the Compiler cant really be used separate from the IDE
I cant say WHAT ValaCode will or wont do but the tool chain is open source so its not so different from Java
Edit text files in whatever editor you want
Run the open source compiler
Generate your app
The ValaCode IDE saves each source file as a Vala source file (plain text). The project settings file is a json file. When you build your project within the IDE it generates a meson build file which is also plain text and readable in other software.
The only closed source part of the ValaCode IDE is the application itself and the libraries we’ve created.
Hahaha you are not even reacting to the question for a trial version. That`s a good sign for what it is. A black and hidden box. All vendors allowing testing before buying.
Nobody can trust this product from the beginning. I would recommend you to provide at least a trial version so people can see what they will get for this high amount of money. You even do not provide any information like 30 days refund or stuffs like that. Maybe you are beginner in this environment but I do not know any vendor acting like you. For me far away from a recommendation to buy it. Even if it would be the holy grail of Software development.
Hence Vala is a language really close to Java language I guess you could generate trust and you are able to provide a trial version of the IDE.
Beside this you can use also IntelliJIdea Community edition with Vala Plugin to have what this IDE provides and even much more functionality. As fat as I can see there is not more functionalits for Vala. What I want to say with this: provide what makes the IDE better than that. I have a real problem with this kind of sales management you try to provide here.
Trust me I understand fully that you are not interested in the product. I’m not entirely sure why it irritates you so much even if it’s not something you are interested in.
I haven’t commented on a trial because the product is currently not released - It will be launching next month. I’m aware of a lot of closed source software without free trials, of course in case of issues distance selling facilitates refunds. That being said I have not ruled out a trial version.
As previously stated I do not believe this to be a high amount of money which you are fixated on.
If this thread and product cause you such issue please just ignore it.
Why should I? I am interested in the development of Vala in future especially while it’s development branch is that small. So I can see what a few people caan move in development of a programming language. Your next thing is you are in next month releasing. is it so to understand that release 1 and release two never released? Cause from what I can read you are starting to present version three. But what is with the first two releases? So I was even thinking about the situation why there is no Version 2 trial download? Maybe it is a bit confusing what you are presenting for third parties and also for your possible customers.
And it is your believing that I am not interested. I am always interested to see new solutions. There are many projects I am even spening money for without even using them only to take care that they can exist cause they are needed arpund the open source development scene. Means: you are deciding about me while your conclusions are not connected to reality.
I apologise if I have misunderstood your posts; it appeared that you were not interested in the product or the language.
For Version 1 - it was a ‘bootstrap’/testing release to facilitate early development. It was shared with a small number of external developers for feedback.
For Version 2 - This built on version 1 but was missing features like Git integration and the libraries were lacking some features. It was shared with the same external developers for feedback.
The version numbers represent changes in the API; changes to the construct methods for the objects, changes to the parameters for the functions etc. Version 3.0 is the first public release, the first two versions were internal and limited private release.
I will be uploading the developer documentation for the libraries to the website over the coming days - these will be public.
Geany has a sidebar that makes it very easy to jump to a particular point in your code, it’s something I can’t live without now:
I had a little go with Gnome Builder ( boy is it hefty 
), although it has autocomplete for Vala and a few other nice features I really didn’t like it - I couldn’t find how to make a similar sidebar or toolbar appear ( and it kept opening two instances of itself 
) so I’m back to Geany for now.
My experimental Vala http server is now reading the full request and it currently just echoes the body of any incoming POST request. It’s still only 104kb 
. Now I need to familiarise myself with Vala’s JSON and SQLite functions…
This is something Netbeans came along with, all good IDE’s having it. Without that it is like loosing the contact to the code.
I agree this feature is essential in an IDE.
I’m glad you are getting on well with Vala.
Presumably ValaCode IDE could be used for vanilla Vala without your libraries?
Imo the IDE itself being closed source isn’t too much of a worry, it might a utility that’s nice to have but it’s not a disaster if some day it’s gone. I wouldn’t want to be snookered by the injection of closed source libraries though.
The problem with the closed source libs is at the end: when the vendor stops living the libs are not actualized. In some cases the nect OS release can break your neck immediately. That’s the risk. And at the moment there is a couple of customers but not enough the story ends up. And you’re hangin in it.
Yes, this is correct. The IDE can be used for Vanilla projects without the dependency on the closed source libraries.
Do you think, in your opinion, source availability of the libraries to paying customers would limit this risk, in a similar way to open sourcing them would?
If the customers can build with this sources yes a bit. But open source is helping to build uo communities. If 500 are there with the same problem you will always find poeople working with you on it. Small teams are dangerous to rely an entire Business on. Was always dangerous and is also later dangerous. What if you die? Nobody will take care after. The project ends. Everybody using closed source libs will not be able to do anything with it if the system changes.
When open sourced you are in the risk that third parties using your libs also, I can understand. But it gives you in the most cases much more security
We are examining the source availability route, however, are not currently considering open sourcing the libraries at this time.
So people getting them only when and if paying for the IDE?
That is correct.