Licensing

[Tribulex]

So I heard Lua scripts for spring have to be gpl. t/f?

[Forboding Angel]

true, if it's linking to the engine.

[manolo_]

so u will never release ur superb widgets (e.g. com-hud or anti-cheat-hgadgets)

[Tribulex]

com hud is broken, the working parts are in the xta gui. The anticheat gadgets will NEVER be released publicly because then BA will implement them and half of my widgets wont work.

So basically any call to Spring.* or gl.* means i have to make it gpl?


I guess this means my only choice is code obsfuscation.

[SinbadEV]

wait a minute... I thought we determined that Lua scripts counted as content... meaning that they can be licensed separately...

[Kloot]

http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17847

We believe generally all LUA, COB, BOS scripts are "linking" to the engine, to speak in the terms of the GPL again. In practice this means many LUA, COB and BOS scripts need to be licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL.

[SinbadEV]

I stand corrected.

[aegis]

linking to the engine? what if I release a public domain tool implementing the same apis, able to run the scripts, and it just so happens the lua scripts can also run on spring?

and what about lgpl? can there be an lgpl abstraction layer linking to the engine, and code with a proprietary license linking to the lgpl code?

[Tribulex]

what happens if I place a restrictive license on a lua. Spring Engine Party Van?

[Argh]

If you really want to keep something to yourself, for resume purposes or whatever... just never release it. It worked for Zpock, who was working on some fairly amazing (at the time) stuff, showed us some screenshots of it working... then disappeared.

Otherwise, you're operating under the same legal rules the rest of us do.

IOW, obfuscation's probably your best bet, if you want to release it as part of a game here- if it's not amazingly spectacular, and is very hard to use with other projects, people's laziness guarantees that it won't get ported.

[Tobi]

Obfuscation is against the license as you must distribute the source in the preferred form for modification. (i.e. not obfuscated)

Of course if you directly write and maintain the code in an obfuscated way it's fine, but you may not keep better (not obfuscated) source for yourself.

[Pako]

Just copyright it whatever you want and everyone violating that is clearly violating your copyright even if they think it should be GPL.
You maybe violating the copyrights of the GPL licenced work but different countries have different laws about copyright/citating/fair use etc.
Hypothetically someone can sue you but it's a very long way untill there and about worst what can happen is that next time you go to that certain country you are asked to pay a huge fine.

Of course it can cause some agitation in certain groups.

(I haven't even read GPL or neither have got any legal education)

[Tribulex]

oh man that picture made me lol really hard. usually i only lol that hard when i am playing spring with noruas.

Okay, so I can program in chinese, make sure my code is impossible to put into other projects by screwing with lots of files and dependencies (this wont be hard because its for an *A project, and CA has done similar tactics in some cases), or some combination of the two.

Alternatively i can be the cool guy in Pako's picture, and then everyone in spring will hate me.

[MidKnight]

What are you asking all of these edgy questions for? Do you have some sort of top-secret proprietary code that's going to propel your exclusive trademark to the top of the software industry or something?

[Beherith]

make sure my code is impossible to put into other projects by screwing with lots of files and dependencies (this wont be hard because its for an *A project, and CA has done similar tactics in some cases)

Thats a very serious accusation at a mod that has shared everything it has.
Care to provide supporting evidence?

[Argh]

1. My comment about obfuscation was meant as a joke. I guess that went over everybody's head, and I apologize. Honestly, I figured it would be funny watching Tribulex trying to confuse more experienced coders and wasting his time.

Tribulex, you have to know that, of all people here, I would probably have the strongest interest in actually using obfuscation, right? But not only do I not do that, I deliberately go the other way, and usually comment out the wazoo. Why? Because I know that:

A. Even the good stuff I write doesn't tend to get used a lot. I can show people videos that should be utterly convincing about why to use XYZ, and it still doesn't get used. A lot of the time, it's because it takes a lot of actual work to use it, and people get gunshy at that point- they like stuff where it's drag-and-drop and requires no real work. Heck, if you want to deter the vast majority of projects, you merely have to make it dependent on writing some customParams or having to mess about with detailed configuration...

B. If you're building work that will eventually show up on your resume, you'll look a lot cooler to employers if you not only can demonstrate working code, but that you can explain it to others. Coders are usually working in teams these days- demonstrating that you can provide documentation and function within a team, by showing projects you've built here and community use, is a big positive.

2. CA doesn't practice obfuscation. Uneven documentation, maybe, but that's not a sin, and they've given Spring a terrific amount of its plunder in terms of codebase, so I don't think that's very fair.

[Forboding Angel]

make sure my code is impossible to put into other projects by screwing with lots of files and dependencies (this wont be hard because its for an *A project, and CA has done similar tactics in some cases)

Thats a very serious accusation at a mod that has shared everything it has.
Care to provide supporting evidence?

Don't need any. Enough of us content devs have had to deal with it in the past. There is a very good reason why many of us won't touch ca lua with a 10 foot pole.

Also, lets say I create a gadget in evo that can do anything you want it to do, including giving you a handjob while you play, but I make it hard as fuck to use and even harder to implement in anything besides evo. Exactly how generous was I in the first place? (In case you didn't notice, this is a direct analogy to CA lua)

[Tribulex]

I figured it would be funny watching Tribulex trying to confuse more experienced coders and wasting his time.

well now you have done it!
THIS MEANS WAR!!!!!

(just because i dont know shit about opengl doesnt mean I don't know how to program >:( )










WE WILL CUT YOU!!

[Argh]

I'd be quaking in my boots, but I'm too busy drooling and staring slackjawed at the cool Giant Robots.

[quantum]

Also, lets say I create a gadget in evo that can do anything you want it to do, including giving you a handjob while you play, but I make it hard as fuck to use and even harder to implement in anything besides evo. Exactly how generous was I in the first place? (In case you didn't notice, this is a direct analogy to CA lua)

We don't make our scripts intentionally hard to use, in fact we've often helped other devs adapt our scripts to their mods (including your mod). We don't make every piece of script copy-pasteable because it would require 10x the work. It's already pretty impressive that there are some complex scripts that can be re-used.

Will you please stop seeing CA conspiracies everywhere? Can you offer some clear evidence for once, instead of analogies and loaded questions?