Spring RTS Engine

Plainly: I'm interested in making a mod, if I do, can I package it up with the spring engine and put it up as a installer given I fully credit spring for the engine? (and be in the right/legal)

Short Answer: Probably

I believe PURE is doing this and Imperial Winter is planning to aswell.

Short answer: Yes. Sortof.

Due to being GPL, if you modify the engine in any way that code must be rereleased under GPL. If you're going to code in lua, or any of the mod coding resources (which are honestly probably easier to use for making a game out of spring anyways), that material is considered proprietary Copy Right and sources do not need to be released.

As per GPL requirements, you also must provide a readme file with your project, clearly stating that the spring project resources used are GPL, and containing a link to our project (or the code base hosted elsewhere).

So ultimately, ya, it's pretty easy, but it's not just a matter of credit, you also must legally comply to GPL. It means having a readme somewhere instead of just posting our name somewhere. but still a very easy requirement to meet.

SwiftSpear wrote:Short answer: Yes. Sortof.

Due to being GPL, if you modify the engine in any way that code must be rereleased under GPL. If you're going to code in lua, or any of the mod coding resources (which are honestly probably easier to use for making a game out of spring anyways), that material is considered proprietary Copy Right and sources do not need to be released.

If I recall correctly this is true for LGPL license.

Since the engine is released under GPL, the sources have to be provided for any modifications of the engine, or any interfacing programs which use the engine (i.e. lua mods). I had to face this problem with another GPL project and we had to switch to LGPL to allow to close the source of the external programs using the GPL one.

Most of the projects tend to ignore it, but you have to be very careful when you will attempt to distribute something commercially with such an obvious license conflict.

you can do whatever you want cause nobody cares, nobody will sue you, and if you bring new players or make spring famous we'll just be happy :) and stop with that big license crap

Satirik wrote:you can do whatever you want cause nobody cares, nobody will sue you, and if you bring new players or make spring famous we'll just be happy :) and stop with that big license crap

You can only speak for your self.
People don't choose GPL because they think it does not matter what happens to there content.

If I release content under GPL I want that it will be handled correctly like GPL describes it. If it does not matter for me what will be done with my content I choose Public Doamin or MIT and not GPL.

Sringsprung: Be carefully with licenses.

Agon wrote:

Satirik wrote:you can do whatever you want cause nobody cares, nobody will sue you, and if you bring new players or make spring famous we'll just be happy :) and stop with that big license crap

You can only speak for your self.
People don't choose GPL because they think it does not matter what happens to there content.

If I release content under GPL I want that it will be handled correctly like GPL describes it. If it does not matter for me what will be done with my content I choose Public Doamin or MIT and not GPL.

Sringsprung: Be carefully with licenses.

i speak for the whole internet with a brain

Sure cops will take him from his bed cause he made a standalone mod based on a GPLed game.

Masure wrote:Sure cops will take him from his bed cause he made a standalone mod based on a GPLed game.

That's not about it. That's about respecting the work of spring devs.

Although providing a link to the svn into your readme file will probably be enough, and allright with spring devs, if you don't modify spring source, wich i don't see why you would like to.

I mean, i don't get the source with spring installer, do i ?

[LBF]Vache wrote:

Masure wrote:Sure cops will take him from his bed cause he made a standalone mod based on a GPLed game.

That's not about it. That's about respecting the work of spring devs.

Although providing a link to the svn into your readme file will probably be enough, and allright with spring devs, if you don't modify spring source, wich i don't see why you would like to.

I mean, i don't get the source with spring installer, do i ?

That's not about it. That's about discouraging people to work cause of useless concerns in the first time.

The good answer is "Spring engine devs will be pleased to see new content makers work. You will see license issues in due time with them"

You shouldn't need to ask this, and these replies should be a lot simpler:

If you build a game with your content, then you can bundle it with spring on a CD and sell it.

If you modify the engine in your game, then you must make public any modifications you distribute. This does not apply to modifications you made at home that never see the light of day.

If your using content from another game or project you must abide by their licenses too. For example, making a TA based mod and selling it makes you liable for a hefty lawsuit and damages from Atari.

go for it guy, the part the devs are really going to be interested in are the changes you made anyway. you know if you add cool new enhancements to the engine.

have fun!

I would still like to clarify the point:

1) You do NOT need to release the source for the unreleased files. (I.e. if I dont have .exe file, I cant claim the source from you)

2) You MUST provide the source for ANY modifications of the spring engine code for the publicly released binaries. (If I can get the exe file, I will also have to be able to get access to the source)

3) This point is always misinterpreted, but you MUST provide all sources of the programs using the spring through the spring interface. In this case spring has lua interface for lua scripting. If I will get your mod, I also have to have access to the sources of the lua scripts (as well as any other modifications of the engine from the point N2).



I am just making sure that this will be correctly understood, since as I mentioned before, I had this problem already, and I was proved wrong and I had to release to interfacing scripts for another project of mine.


Yet again, noone really cares, but this can happen, and having to deal with misinterpreted licensing issues isnt the prettiest thing in life.

==Troy== wrote:You do NOT need to release the source for the unreleased files.

What kind of license forces people to release sources of unreleased projects?

==Troy== wrote:You MUST provide the source for ANY modifications of the spring engine code for the publicly released binaries.

Is there any modder that has forked Spring yet? I believe FLOZi and KDR know enough C++ to have submitted engine patches once or twice, but that's far from assuming every wannabee modder will necessarily modify the spring.exe source.

==Troy== wrote:I also have to have access to the sources of the lua scripts

What is the source of a LUA script? Lua being an interpreted language, I don't see any "object files" and "source files" distinction like in C. So everytime a lua file is included in a mod, it's source and object in the same time and I don't know how one would remove the lua "source" while still keeping the LUA script in working order.

tbh every1 baawing about licenses is off putting to new people wanting to make stuff for spring. I know he asked but still every thread about new content is bombarded with licenses flame wars and intepretations.

TBH every1 should back the F*** off and let people worry about it when content is actually made because all this licenses talk is getting no work done and people agitated. And the first thing new content dev's see when coming into Spring is license wars and its off putting so stop it K THX BAI.

Otherside, Sringsprung wanted an answer to the question, I am sure Sringsprung got it. I wish Sringsprung luck with his/her new project.

Agon wrote:

Satirik wrote:you can do whatever you want cause nobody cares, nobody will sue you, and if you bring new players or make spring famous we'll just be happy :) and stop with that big license crap

You can only speak for your self.
People don't choose GPL because they think it does not matter what happens to there content.

If I release content under GPL I want that it will be handled correctly like GPL describes it. If it does not matter for me what will be done with my content I choose Public Doamin or MIT and not GPL.

Sringsprung: Be carefully with licenses.

Spring got kind of complicated in regard with how the GPL licence is handled. Spring is GPLed because we want changes to the engine legally required to be always publically available. Mods were originally designed to be immune to GPL, but the inclusion of lua kind of ambiguated the property of a mod by changing the structure of how the mod links into the engine. Generally speaking, Spring will not pursue issues with any users regarding LUA content. We encourage people to rerelease any lua content they create, because we believe it's good for the community, but we generally still consider it modding content, and thus we consider it up the the creator what license it should use.