I'm glad you like it. However, the original intention of Tradelink as an open source project was that we could take it and modify it however we wanted. Pracplay one day decided to start removing functionality (including whole apps from the source) so that it could only be used with Glean, a for $$ product. Thanks Pracplay. You made Tradelink irrelevant.
i understand if they only support clients. this is finance after all. if you want to make money and do open source you gotta charge for support or charge for an add on. the core is still open and free. like you said if you don't want to use glean, don't use it. i use glean without the source code but if i got to the tradelink project now i can see the source code. it looks like they request a donation, did you donate? maybe i don't understand what you're responding to. my perspective is that pracplay and other trading firms put most of the code into tradelink. so if you're an individual using it a and you didn't have a good relationship the big guys... they don't know you from adam. i have had that happen and it sucks. so i use something and like it i try to patronize it somehow. this way we both know we're working for the same aim. otherwise you're gambling that the paying people care about the same stuff as you. even if it works for a while, when it stops it sucks. it's not pracplay's fault that it costs money to do open source. i'm not saying it's your fault either. like i said i don't really understand your beef to say either way.
why would they ask for donations if it was a true open-source project where people contribute and volunteer code and code reviews? From the beginning I did not get the impression it was supposed to be a true open-source project, it felt from the start as if the original contributors had in mind a commercial product in the future. I asked years ago about claimed FIX connectivity capabilities and was pointed to 50 lines of code (basically an empty POCO, and not much else). I think the guys who commercialized a fork or main branch did so way too early. Nowadays you can come across 20 or so free to use (pay to trade) "quant" or testing/trading frameworks that are way more sophisticated than the base tradelink repo functionality and even if I contributed until this point in time I would seriously ask myself what the benefit would be to continue adding code. Having said all that, I still wonder (and despite asking in the forum never got an answer): Why was code put into the framework very early on that contacts a server to submit information? When I asked what information I was just pointed to the code base, which I did not bother to check out because I did not use the product anyway. But I am still curious and at least wished the tradelink community was a bit more forthright about informing new users of this fact.
Tradelinker, I don't think you understand the history of Tradelink and the road that Pracplay went down. 1) Tradelink was an open source piece of software that anyone could edit the source code and hopefully contribute back. 2) Pracplay, I believe wrote the base platform and contributed the most. 3) One day, they decided to create Glean 4) They crippled the original Tradelink so that it could no longer be used the way it was intended. 5) Many of the original TL users have no interest or need for Glean. So, now the option is to move away from TL entirely or continue with our their own versions and basically destroy the whole idea of Open Source. Let me repeat. Pracplay crippled TL so that they could force everyone into Glean. This isn't about donations, or paying for support. They didn't add Glean as an additional option. They simply crippled TL so that you have to use pay for and use Glean. The core is not open and free. It isn't even available in its entirety anymore. Pracplay crippled and removed vital pieces of the codebase to force users into Glean. I have no problem Pracplay charging for support and they always have. You are not seeing the entire thing. I know you are new to TL, but what you see now isn't what it used to be.
Rum Runner (or anyone else who cares to comment): Have you found any viable alternatives to TradeLink? I just read through the history of the "TradeLink Forkers" and it appears the project is dead: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/tradelink-free/-yxx3azkfu0 It also appears that Pracplay is not a company to do business with. It would be great to see a fork of TradeLink with a critical mass of developers to maintain it... especially in the area of broker/data connections.
I don't have anything to recommend. Sorry. If you don't mind switching to Java, there is another open source project called Algo Trader. I don't know how good it is or not. Yes, it would be nice to see a TL fork with developers. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that is going to happen. The original Tradelink never really had a bunch of developers either. It was mostly just PracPlay and a spattering of a few other people.
I think m4 from modulus might be what you are looking for. It is not free, but it is fully supported, not broker-specific, and you get source code. The financial industry is run on dollars which require constant updates to keep up with technology, and so free open source projects don't seem to take off much unless they are incubated properly (mainly with development capital). I agree with syswizard on a different thread. It is unrealistic to expect experienced traders to commit their free time to such a demanding task of building/maintaining a trading package (and with in-demand skills). It is what it is. I used to be critical of MetaTrader 4 and the like but having delved into the development side of trading systems, I can say that it is a relief to be able to 'start somewhere' that is fairly stable and robust and isn't much cost to maintain (to the end user) and still provide decent algo capability. Of course when one has greater means (and time), you do better. But you take what you can get and invest in a platform that is likely to serve your needs for the foreseeable future. Multicharts, NT, sierraChart, and a couple of others (broker-independent) are likely to do this. Wewnt to focus on actual trading and strategy development. Let other specialists keep up with the platform development.