Homesource Forums

Homeworld Source Editing Talk
It is currently Wed Jun 28, 2017 12:28 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 10, 2009 11:59 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 12:41 am
Posts: 326
While the forums here are the primary focus of Homesource, and I believe they should be, there can be no doubt that the top-level website...
http://homesource.nekomimicon.net
... has been woefully neglected by me.

So, while I'm updating the Mantis bug tracking system, now would be a good time to consider any additions or changes to the site that people might think appropriate... and we also need to list all the things that have been accomplished with Homeworld SDL since the last front page update in.... 2007? Yeesh. My bad :)

So what's on your mind?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 10:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 2
Why not replace it with a Wiki? Tons of open source games have wikis, even for the top page. See www.freeorion.org as an example of a project wiki done right.

The chief advantage is that documenting the project would be easy-peasy. Design documents, FAQs, roadmaps... No problem. The only downside is that it would have to be locked down a little bit, but that too is trivial.

I've been the admin for a few wikis, I know my way around them pretty good. If you set one up as your top-level page, I'd love to help maintain it and police spam.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:04 pm
Posts: 73
Location: North germany
In theory this would be really good.
Quite frankly I despise 99% of all Wiki software out there (too complicated, too slow, too buggy, etc). The only one I found enjoyable to date is Redmine's.

_________________
.: The hardest punishment are the innocent eyes of a child searching for truth :.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 3:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 2
Redmine's not too bad, it's got built in bug tracker/project feed. Seems a bit lacking overall, but that's probably because I've never spent much time with it.

PunyHuman is a game company that uses redmine, though their only public project it Dystopia, and it's super low activity :/
http://redmine.punyhumangames.com/

Personally, I prefer Trac. Tons of great projects use Trac, and it's interface w/version control software is some of the best I've seen.

Wildfire Games uses Trac for their open source RTS, 0AD
http://trac.wildfiregames.com/

On a related note, could we please get read-only access to subversion for anonymous users?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2011 4:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:04 pm
Posts: 73
Location: North germany
Trac is definitely included in my 99%.

_________________
.: The hardest punishment are the innocent eyes of a child searching for truth :.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:34 am 
Offline
coder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:24 pm
Posts: 324
Location: UK (UTC+0)
gudo wrote:
On a related note, could we please get read-only access to subversion for anonymous users?

This has been requested before but unfortunately I can't because of 1.1b of the licence. As written, the code has to remain within the circle of people that Relic approved to join the Relic Developer Network (RDN). Whilst RDN may have ceased to exist, the intent was clearly to track who had access to the code. Since I maintain the repository the onus is on me to conform with the licence as closely as possible and that means I have to know who has access to it to and be able to supply that information to Relic in the unlikely event they (or their parent company) ask.

_________________
MacHomeworld | HomeworldSDL.org


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 3:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:46 pm
Posts: 19
lmop wrote:
gudo wrote:
On a related note, could we please get read-only access to subversion for anonymous users?

This has been requested before but unfortunately I can't because of 1.1b of the licence. As written, the code has to remain within the circle of people that Relic approved to join the Relic Developer Network (RDN). Whilst RDN may have ceased to exist, the intent was clearly to track who had access to the code. Since I maintain the repository the onus is on me to conform with the licence as closely as possible and that means I have to know who has access to it to and be able to supply that information to Relic in the unlikely event they (or their parent company) ask.

Has anyone been able to contact Relic about license modification ?
Maybe we can convince them to release the game as GPLv2 (or v3), along with the data...

That is the biggest blocker to getting new people to help, if everything is walled off, then things tend to stagnate.

Who controls SVN access these days, was looking to fix it for MSVC 10, so it can compile, like the original source did.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 2:00 am 
Offline
coder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:24 pm
Posts: 324
Location: UK (UTC+0)
BugsMenot wrote:
Has anyone been able to contact Relic about license modification ?
I have, but unfortunately have not reached anyone with the authority to get it changed. The Homeworld franchise has changed hands since the original source code release which complicates things (Sierra owned the franchise when the source code was released; it's now owned by THQ). Whilst I never received a definitive answer one way or the other, from the correspondence I've had, I believe the possibility of a change to the source code licence to be highly unlikely, which is why I stopped pursuing it.

BugsMenot wrote:
Who controls SVN access these days, was looking to fix it for MSVC 10, so it can compile, like the original source did.
I do. See: HomeworldSDL.org.

_________________
MacHomeworld | HomeworldSDL.org


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:04 pm
Posts: 73
Location: North germany
lmop is there anyone specific you corresponded with? I think I would really like to have a definite answer to the question.

_________________
.: The hardest punishment are the innocent eyes of a child searching for truth :.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 3:47 pm 
Offline
coder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:24 pm
Posts: 324
Location: UK (UTC+0)
LCID Fire wrote:
lmop is there anyone specific you corresponded with? I think I would really like to have a definite answer to the question.
I've PM'd you.

_________________
MacHomeworld | HomeworldSDL.org


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 12:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:46 pm
Posts: 19
lmop wrote:
BugsMenot wrote:
Has anyone been able to contact Relic about license modification ?
I have, but unfortunately have not reached anyone with the authority to get it changed. The Homeworld franchise has changed hands since the original source code release which complicates things (Sierra owned the franchise when the source code was released; it's now owned by THQ). Whilst I never received a definitive answer one way or the other, from the correspondence I've had, I believe the possibility of a change to the source code licence to be highly unlikely, which is why I stopped pursuing it.

BugsMenot wrote:
Who controls SVN access these days, was looking to fix it for MSVC 10, so it can compile, like the original source did.
I do. See: HomeworldSDL.org.

I see.
What about including the demo data? AFAICT, that wouldn't break any (c) or rules...

Oh also, from what I see in the license, it don't seem to be possible to port this over to some other platforms, and I think I saw mention on android & ipad ? I don't think that is allowed, is it ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 4:35 am 
Offline
coder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:24 pm
Posts: 324
Location: UK (UTC+0)
It's always tricky (legally) making data available in a form which was not originally available, even if that data was otherwise publicly released. So, yes, we could include, or provide access to, the publicly available demo installer. Extracting the files it contains and just distributing some/all of those is not so clear-cut.

There was a case when the game was released of someone explaining how to play the full game (near enough) by using the data in the demo. I must admit I'm a bit fuzzy with the details; I would have thought that would only be possible if the player pirated the main game binary too but at that point why wouldn't they pirate the data as well? (Please note that I am not condoning piracy of Homeworld, just recounting an early hack! The game is so cheap now there's no excuse for not getting a legitimate copy.) My point is that re-combining various bits of publicly released game data/code to achieve results not originally intended by the publisher could create grounds for legal proceedings.

The source code stills retains the hooks for the demo and I was working on getting it working again. The main issues are that the demo, Raider Retreat and the main game all use slightly different variants of the various data files because they were all produced at different points in development. Since they were all stand-alone and only the main game would be actively patched, that didn't really matter to Relic. It does make things tricky to fix for us, particularly since we don't have full code history; we start at the snapshot of code that Relic released and that post-dates everything.

Which part of the license do you think prevents cross-platform development? That's not an interpretation I've seen before and i couldn't see anything after re-reading it!

_________________
MacHomeworld | HomeworldSDL.org


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:46 pm
Posts: 19
lmop wrote:
It's always tricky (legally) making data available in a form which was not originally available, even if that data was otherwise publicly released. So, yes, we could include, or provide access to, the publicly available demo installer. Extracting the files it contains and just distributing some/all of those is not so clear-cut.

There was a case when the game was released of someone explaining how to play the full game (near enough) by using the data in the demo. I must admit I'm a bit fuzzy with the details; I would have thought that would only be possible if the player pirated the main game binary too but at that point why wouldn't they pirate the data as well? (Please note that I am not condoning piracy of Homeworld, just recounting an early hack! The game is so cheap now there's no excuse for not getting a legitimate copy.) My point is that re-combining various bits of publicly released game data/code to achieve results not originally intended by the publisher could create grounds for legal proceedings.

I don't believe you can still buy the Sierra/Relic version, only the Euro Vivendi/Relic one, which has a different contract apparently.
The demo data don't have this limitation at all.


Quote:
The source code stills retains the hooks for the demo and I was working on getting it working again. The main issues are that the demo, Raider Retreat and the main game all use slightly different variants of the various data files because they were all produced at different points in development. Since they were all stand-alone and only the main game would be actively patched, that didn't really matter to Relic. It does make things tricky to fix for us, particularly since we don't have full code history; we start at the snapshot of code that Relic released and that post-dates everything.

Which part of the license do you think prevents cross-platform development? That's not an interpretation I've seen before and i couldn't see anything after re-reading it!


Correct me if I am wrong, but Sierra On-Line & Relic were the 'owners', then Sierra got bought out by Activision. That pretty much means that Activision would hold all the cards for doing more Homeworld games, unless that part didn't transfer over on the sale, and Relic still owns "Homeworld".
In any case, since it says "distribute the SOFTWARE PRODUCT and the MODIFIED SOFTWARE" which means the source code & anything you have done to the source code, and "solely for non-commercial purposes, and only to registered members of RDN-RELIC Developer's Network who have agreed to abide by the terms of this Agreement." means that it can't be made available to anyone but people on the now defunct RDN-Relic Developer's Network.

Now, you may be saying, that this means we are all screwed... but after reviewing the terms, this little nugget is included,
Quote:
3.1 Term. This Agreement shall become effective as of the date LICENSEE downloads or installs the SOFTWARE PRODUCT and shall expire five (5) years after such date.

It is now 2012, and so, this whole contract has expired, except for,
Quote:
3.3 Survival. Sections 1.4, 1.5, 2.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 4.2, 5.1 and 7 shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement.

Which are:
1.4 Indemnity, 1.5 Trademarks, 2.1 Ownership, 3.2 Termination. RELIC may, at its sole discretion and authority, terminate this Agreement immediately upon notice including without limitation notice via email to LICENSEE, 4.1 NO WARRANTIES., 4.2 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY., 5.1 COPYRIGHT., and 7. General (too big to post)

This also means that Relic can do whatever they want with this now, which seems to indicate that if they don't want to be bothered with this, at worst, you can get a cease & desist letter *if* you include the original data (and not the demo's data).

In any case, this all boils down to section 1.1b is voided now, which means that this can be thrown up on sourceforge or githib or whatever else.
Assuming that the original data can't be distributed along with the source, then the only option would be to use the demo's data files, and release builds that way, but ONLY if it is for non-commercial purposes, which means you can't charge for it at all, so all apple stuff is out, since apple requires a charge, not really sure for android, but I suppose it might be a safer bet, but not sure if android requires a contract or not, to keep it active, and not a brick.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:52 am 
Offline
coder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:24 pm
Posts: 324
Location: UK (UTC+0)
Since this conversation has diverged from the original intent of the thread, I've posted my reply in a new thread about the Homeworld source code licence.

_________________
MacHomeworld | HomeworldSDL.org


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group