Morph and deploy gadgets GPL question.

[Forboding Angel]

I prefer PD, "Feel free to print this out and use it as toilet paper".

PD + Germany = Not so awesome remember?

Also, unfortunately many countries refuse to accept PD as a license of any kind, which causes all kinds and no end of trouble. Hence, my adoption of the above license. I figure it's as close to PD as i can possibly get and still hvae a "valid" license.

[KDR_11k]

Yeah, yeah, CC-PD then. (CC-BY-SA is more like GPL than PD)

[smoth]

so.. can I get permission to use morph and deploy as non-gpl? Past all the debate, I need to know a yes or no.

[KingRaptor]

jK (a lot of morph is his work) absolutely refuses to release his work under a CC license, and I couldn't talk him into using LGPL either.

You'll either have to get the first revision of the morph gadget from trepan, or whatever it is the IW team uses.

[lurker]

I could semi-quickly write simple substitutes without the fancy visualization, and then add a visualization later after I learn how.

[smoth]

fucking hell.

I used to think highly of open source development, share and create. Save time by not rewriting redundant code. Instead we have to recreate code that already exists because of the DOGMA of the open source environment and it's cultists. Hell this is so stupid.

Fine, rather then producing content that is new and interesting, I get to rewrite some bullshit that was already written just so I can use it. Wonderful how all this works, I remember when I was once accused of being greedy for not openly sharing everything I do. Yet GPL is such that I am forced to write redundant code.

You know... just hell. Screw it. Shit like this makes me want to have nothing to do with with this shit. I got into spring because I saw an open environment free of any stupid bullshit where people could freely share code and snippets all in the spirit of creativity and personal education. However, I find the more I learn about this "open" world the more that I HATE it's dogmatic structure.

I can understand protecting code from corporate assholes who may integrate it into their applications but fuck people. No one wants our shit. We are just a bunch of rank amateurs fucking around and making nifty things. This kills my will to do anything for the community knowing there is a special club that gets to have their own special cult bullshit. Hey that is fine you can put stipulations on your work but if you ask me, this shit is not open. IT IS STIFLED SOURCE DEVELOPMENT! this breaks my fuckin' heart, I once thought so highly of this environment.


Moderators please lock this thread before it turns into GPL DEBATE 9000!

[KDR_11k]

Er, if morph has so many contributors you'd need all of them to sign off on an exception anyway. Also morph uses regular TA resources, AFAIK you don't even have a mod that does.

[Forboding Angel]

I have to say, I side with smoth here. GPL in a project like spring is a disaster.

TBH we should be honored if ideas in our games show up in commercial games.

The engine needs to be protected, beyond that, it's pretty much pointless to have the Ever looming monster of gplness hanging over our heads.

[AF]

Code: Select all

licencedeclaration = licencedeclaration.replaceAll("GPL","LGPL");

If only the people who used gpl had known of this code fragment, or at the very least, listened when told about LGPL.

[det]

It seems that most of the people who are frustrated by the GPL and who say that the GPL is broken are people who want to use CA stuff in their own closed games. A number of CA devs have come forward to express that they chose the GPL specifically _because_ they don't want closed games to use their stuff. Claiming they should go LGPL or PD or CC-whatever to solve the situation makes no sense. The situation is _fine_ in their eyes.

The fact that people behind closed games in this community constantly attack the use of the GPL is just mind boggling. You don't want to share your work, but you feel confident in criticizing people who _are_ sharing their work? You don't like the GPL? Fine, just consider GPL mods to be closed to you, just like your mod is closed to them. If you take a step over the line and join the GPL ecosytem, however, suddenly the world opens up to you.

[KDR_11k]

Smoth cannot use GPL in Gundam, it's not his IP so he can't relicense it. Same for SWIW and *A. Those contain proprietary material used without a license and cannot be made GPL.

[AF]

Oh I'm not saying that people should take their closed games and mark them as LGPL.

Im saying the GPL people should change to LGPL.

However you have a point with CA and them deliberately doing it to prevent the very thing people are complaining they cant do, and I agree, my comments were directed towards people releasing things to be used by everyone yet using the GPL licence.

Either way det your comment clears it all up nicely where tonnes of thread failed to do so.

[smoth]

You don't want to share your work, but you feel confident in criticizing people who _are_ sharing their work?

Open your fucking eyes! I do share my work you fuckwitt. TD is going to be given to the community and the only part of gundam that isn't given away are the models and unit files as they represent the core of the game's identity. There is nothing wrong with not wanting *GRTS. Call me greedy all you fucking want. you assholes stole your ta content. Gundam was scratch built and you know what, the fact that all I keep are the models and unit defs is nothing compaired to the theft that is the TA mods.

What have YOU made DET? Tobi asked for islands in war, I dropped everything made it and gpled it for him. No one was making ta units so I re made the morty. I have given away all my effects scripts effect are etc. Anything that is truely mine to give away.

IF you were literate and could read you would know that GUNDAM'S IP does not belong to me and as such the NAMES and identity of the units MUST be protected as it isn't my ip. Sure it is my fan art but I cannot license it GPL. Go fuck yourself, you have no right to call me greedy.

[det]

My post was directed at the community at large. I would never try to communicate with you directly, Smoth. I have long ago learned that any conversation with you is a contest to see how fast you can martyr yourself as quickly as possible.

[smoth]

The fact that people behind closed games in this community constantly attack the use of the GPL is just mind boggling. You don't want to share your work, but you feel confident in criticizing people who _are_ sharing their work? You don't like the GPL? Fine, just consider GPL mods to be closed to you, just like your mod is closed to them. If you take a step over the line and join the GPL ecosytem, however, suddenly the world opens up to you.

You replied after me and did not specify the community. more correctly you used the term YOU not they or them.

edits to add quote.

[Nemo]

Note that Smoth's response was generally appropriate for a good portion of the non *A games. At least for S44 - we're sharing everything (our SVN is publicly accessible, if not advertised) and anyone is welcome to use the things we have built, but we don't want GPL because we dislike the fact that it forces others to share (hence not using CC-SA).

So at least in our case, your argument doesn't really hold. We have the game under a dual license now (all stuff besides the borrowed morph gadget and ETA/custom formations widget are CC-attribution-noncommercial and GPL - the user can pick which they want to use, those Lua bits which are not ours are GPL exclusively). But if we could remove those things with our own comparable work and make everything CC-Attribution-noncommercial, we'd be much happier.


If a GPL-free morph gadget turns up, we'll probably use that instead of what we have now. Much as CA is eventually trying to break away from TA IP, we're trying to remove bits of GPL from our game.

Edit: In case I wasn't clear - we picked Creative Commons - Attribution - Non-commercial because it 1) allows people to use our work without problematic strings attached, but prevents them from selling it, and 2) we get some form of credit (we're not fussy about that - a line in a credits.txt in the folder is plenty).

Basically, it's as close to the old-style "honor system" as is possible, it makes sharing/borrowing easy, and still prevents people from stealing the work and profiting from it.

[smoth]

I miss the old honor system. If it wasn't for certain people in the community we would spend more time developing and less time fighting over this gpl bullshit.

[Nemo]

Now that I've thought about it a bit more:

Det, who precisely are you referring to when you talk about "the community" with all their closed source models and desire for CA work?

IW & Gundam are explicitly avoiding anything GPL (plus Gundam is sharing everything that's smoth's to share, as seen in the mod forum, and IW has said they're open to others using their code & work once they've released). So it's not them.

I've covered S44, so you know we're not the closed source stealers.

PURE has been accounted for by Argh's epic post in general - he's not using any of CA's work, and also making sure that *A doesn't use any of his.

*A (setting aside CA for a moment) mods really don't need to care about a license, since they're already illegal, so saying that "you took GPL code, now you need to be GPL" is silly, because they can't really GPL anything.

Evo is sharing openly as far as I know.

All of KDR's work is his own, and almost universally released under PD.

As far as I can tell, the only project you could have been referring to is EE, since fang has said a few times that he doesn't want other people using his work without permission, but uses the morph gadget a lot.

I apologize if I missed some other major project, but I feel like you're making an inaccurate characterization here, Det - almost all of the big spring engine projects are either very deliberately not using any of CA's work, or are using an open development model (or share what work that they are able to), or both. So it seems silly to say that the community as a whole is trying to steal CA's work without sharing in return.

When people such as the S44 team, Forb, KDR, smoth, or the IW guys (not that they post much in these things <_<) criticize the use of the GPL, It is inaccurate to simply dismiss us as leechers who don't want to share in return; nobody here can fairly claim the high moral ground (except perhaps KDR ).

[AF]

erm, I would have thought the prime culprit being implied is the *A brigade, mods such as BA.

[quantum]

CA aims to be included in Linux repositories, so we'll need to remove bits of CC-by-nc. By using CC-by-nc you exclude GPL mods. It works the other way around, too. Yet we're not giving anyone a hard time because of it.

There are lots of GPL-compatible licenses that do not force other people to share their mod if they want to use your scripts. If you used one of them for your files, you could use GPL material with no worries as long as the mod as a whole is GPLed. Creative Commons even say that you should not use CC licenses for software.