Slashdot Mirror
Arianne ALPHA 2 Released
Miguel continues: This release of Arianne is a major milestone on our goal to get a working framework for simple online games creation. It features a new working and playable 2D Client with new gfx, music and sfx.
This release features also a working RP system on C++ with the next actions: Move, Chat, Attack, Spell, Get, Put, Consume, Look.
Arianne allows now a hardware limited number of connections to the server so you can have as much players as your hardware allow.
All files on Arianne features XML syntax.
Go to Arianne and get it.
Report problems with Arianne to Sourceforge Bugs Tracker
P.S:
We need binary packages for BeOS and MacOS X.
We need reports about BeOS, MacOSX, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris, IRIX, QNX,
Linux and Windows NT.
We need new GFX ( don't ask what are them, look and do ).
We need new SFX ( _.wav )
From the front page...
:) Are we trying to stop people making money from selling free software and related services?
We still need to discuss the LICENSE of Arianne as actually code is only usable for GPL projects and being an engine that perhaps is not good, also we need to avoid the GPL 2.0 blackhole by, perhaps, switching to Affero GPL to disallow service providers to avoid the GPL restrictions to enforce users rights. Our goals should be:
Open Source
Disallow possible ways of close RP, AI or framework of the Engine
Allow creation of close source clients easily
Disallow use of Arianne by Service providers that doesn't collaborate into Open Source
The resulting license and the discussion to reach it should be done on arianne-general. I WON'T allow any kind of Arianne special License. We DON'T forbid commercialization of Arianne, we forbid closing source the application.
Apart from the fact that I can only make sense of one word in three, I smell confusion. If the code is currently released under GPL, then I guess that's because either (a) it contains code borrowed from some other GPL'd program, (b) one or more of the developers has decided to copyleft their contribution, or (c) both of the above. If you want to modify the license in some way, you'd better start re-writing the parts of the code which are under GPL.
Let's look at these goals:
> Open Source
GPL does that.
> Disallow possible ways of close RP, AI or
> framework of the Engine
GPL does that.
> Allow creation of close source clients easily
Why would you want to do that? As RMS would say, "We are not excluding them from our community; they are choosing not to enter".
> Disallow use of Arianne by Service providers
> that doesn't collaborate into Open Source
Why would you want to do that? If they're not producing a "derivative work", then they cannot infringe on anyone's copyright. I'm not entirely sure what's meant by "collaborate into"; if it means "contribute", then it's blatantly unfair (why should a distributer/service provider have to also write code for the priviledge?); if it means "co-operate with", well it still doesn't make sense
> We DON'T forbid commercialization of Arianne
GPL doesn't do that either.
> we forbid closing source the application.
GPL does that.
I don't understand where this compulsion to avoid the GPL is coming from. I mean, we're writing *free* software here, yes? Seems to be the perfect candidate from where I'm sitting.
(For the full story on "commercialisation" vs GPL see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pragmatic.html)
These sigs are more interesting tha