<!--quoteo(post=1744920:date=Dec 26 2009, 08:44 PM:name=derWalter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (derWalter @ Dec 26 2009, 08:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1744920"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->great, but under which license are they released?!
gpl pls!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why would you think it would be released under GPL? Unless they plan on open sourcing the game, which there has been no talk of, the license would not allow them to GPL any of this code and use it within the game.
<!--quoteo(post=1745271:date=Dec 31 2009, 11:09 AM:name=livinded)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (livinded @ Dec 31 2009, 11:09 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1745271"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why would you think it would be released under GPL? Unless they plan on open sourcing the game, which there has been no talk of, the license would not allow them to GPL any of this code and use it within the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Are you sure about that? It looks like the Updater only touches an XML file and executes a patch setup file, which then does the job of actually patching everything. Unless I read things wrong, wouldn't that constitute two seperate programs (which would be viable under the GPL.)
Which isn't very safe, because, from what I've read so far, the code can still be both modified and distributed without note of modifications made to the code.
Also: Code from the game "DOOM" was released under GNU; from what I can see, the game is still being sold. (On sale from Steam, today, too!)
Which isn't very safe, because, from what I've read so far, the code can still be both modified and distributed without note of modifications made to the code.
Also: Code from the game "DOOM" was released under GNU; from what I can see, the game is still being sold. (On sale from Steam, today, too!)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What does safe mean, safe for who? it all depends on there goal. If they want to ensure the code stays open source forever and they always get credit for it, then yes GPL is the best option. How ever, the GPL makes it very difficult to use the code in any project which is not open source. Or any commercial project, It is a pretty huge pain.
If there goal is to make the code useful to as many people as possible, then BSD is the best by far.
or LGPL, which is what I typically use. As for "safety", I agree, it's not a project maintainer's problem, it's up to the user. Generally, if you're downloading a project from ggcraksz.net instead of the well-known maintainers site, then maybe you deserve that wake-up call.
Comments
gpl pls!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why would you think it would be released under GPL? Unless they plan on open sourcing the game, which there has been no talk of, the license would not allow them to GPL any of this code and use it within the game.
Are you sure about that? It looks like the Updater only touches an XML file and executes a patch setup file, which then does the job of actually patching everything. Unless I read things wrong, wouldn't that constitute two seperate programs (which would be viable under the GPL.)
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/developer/download/" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/developer/download/</a>
Which isn't very safe, because, from what I've read so far, the code can still be both modified and distributed without note of modifications made to the code.
Also: Code from the game "DOOM" was released under GNU; from what I can see, the game is still being sold. (On sale from Steam, today, too!)
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/developer/download/" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/developer/download/</a>
Which isn't very safe, because, from what I've read so far, the code can still be both modified and distributed without note of modifications made to the code.
Also: Code from the game "DOOM" was released under GNU; from what I can see, the game is still being sold. (On sale from Steam, today, too!)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What does safe mean, safe for who? it all depends on there goal. If they want to ensure the code stays open source forever and they always get credit for it, then yes GPL is the best option. How ever, the GPL makes it very difficult to use the code in any project which is not open source. Or any commercial project, It is a pretty huge pain.
If there goal is to make the code useful to as many people as possible, then BSD is the best by far.
As for "safety", I agree, it's not a project maintainer's problem, it's up to the user. Generally, if you're downloading a project from ggcraksz.net instead of the well-known maintainers site, then maybe you deserve that wake-up call.