Oolite Bulletins

DaddyHoggy wrote:

and this is still the best online forum community anywhere

is it really?
I'm posting not often here, but i read often. And some members are not very likely.

DaddyHoggy wrote:

In fact didn't Sung ask people to stop using his textures before he disappeared? (these are genuine questions - I took Sung's textures off after he left (even though I said at the time I wouldn't!))

I can't found such a statement?

Vajo wrote:

I'm posting not often here, but i read often. And some members are not very likely.

I for one have to admit that I am very unlikely.

Vajo wrote:

DaddyHoggy wrote:

and this is still the best online forum community anywhere

is it really?
I'm posting not often here, but i read often. And some members are not very likely.

DaddyHoggy wrote:

In fact didn't Sung ask people to stop using his textures before he disappeared? (these are genuine questions - I took Sung's textures off after he left (even though I said at the time I wouldn't!))

I can't found such a statement?

Feel free to go backwards and forwards from here: https://bb.oolite.space/viewtopic.php?t= ... &start=150

And yes, I stand by my original statement, we're still the friendliest board on the Internet, we often let strange out-of-the-blue, sweeping generalisations go without so much as the fluttering of an eyelid.

Wow.

DaddyHoggy, you just made me post again. Hello.

You pointed me to this quote from LittleBear, which I find especially remarkable concerning the nature of the whole, more recent quarrel:

Sorry. But in my view, YOU CANNOT OWN what you submit to Oolite. We are all ripping off B&B. Anybody can do anything they like with anything I submit to the project. Its not my work, I'm using Giles's code and Giles in turn is using B&B's idea's. Nobody should assert ownership or use any Oolite stuff for commerical purposes. The idea of the project is surley that anything we do for Oolite is share and share alike. If people are gonna start getting on their high horses about stuff and using Oolie for advertising Real World stuff, this is not in the spirit of the the project. Anything I submit is on the basis of "free free to rip off steal or post anything you like from my code" (as long as you are doing it to make Oolite a better game and are not making money out of it). I'm sure every other OXP writer writes code on the same basis. If that is not the spirt then I don't want to be involved.

Has anyone told him that the reason why he presumably left here (again) did not exist, actually? I did, via email, even apologised if I hurted him and asked him to come back.

Ho hum, that was not the reason, then. I wonder what was.

I'm back.

Hi L! Oddly enough when trying to back-up my statement to Vajo I got a strange deja vu feeling re-reading the whole Sung texture thread - sometimes I forget how long I've been around the forum (not as long as some - but I generate a lot more noise compared to many! )

I seem to specialise in holding an olive branch in both hands (or if I'm more honest - a particular bugs bunny cartoon where he stitches a confederate and yankee flag back-to-back and then tries to escape down the Mason-Dixie line with both armies glaring at him - it goes well until the wind flips the flag around... but I digress!)

I hope the return is a permanent one - I look forward to everybody being calm, collected, understanding, hugging and lovin' and that perhaps even, dare I suggest, that O(S)E-lite rises from the ashes?

Welcome back.

And to part answer my own secondary question to Vajo - this is the statement I remember making almost 3yrs ago with regards to Sung's less than complete (it turned out) retexturing of the original ships https://bb.oolite.space/viewtopic.php?t= ... c&start=30

Welcome back also. Now all stay calm and easy But also hope Lb returns so both of you can go on with these great projects

Lestradae wrote:

I'm back.

Runs up with big soft fompy gloved mittens of pure cuddle.

<FOOOMMMP!>

We love you, but we hate you, but we love you! For you are the mirror of ourselves!

<coy> yeah, like we knew like you couldn't like stay away.....

Pa, cha, W.E.R. Din rely mtr. Psh, fsha!

Does that mean your going to put back your oxps? Or are we going to have to coax you?

Yay!!!

Fully speed ahead with OSE then? I'm so inspired I might just have to write another story....

Sorry. But in my view, YOU CANNOT OWN what you submit to Oolite. We are all ripping off B&B. Anybody can do anything they like with anything I submit to the project. Its not my work, I'm using Giles's code and Giles in turn is using B&B's idea's. Nobody should assert ownership or use any Oolite stuff for commerical purposes. The idea of the project is surley that anything we do for Oolite is share and share alike. If people are gonna start getting on their high horses about stuff and using Oolie for advertising Real World stuff, this is not in the spirit of the the project. Anything I submit is on the basis of "free free to rip off steal or post anything you like from my code" (as long as you are doing it to make Oolite a better game and are not making money out of it). I'm sure every other OXP writer writes code on the same basis. If that is not the spirt then I don't want to be involved.

This is exactly what I signed up to with my stories. It could almost be Oolites Raison d'être.

Welcome back L, looking forward to welcoming back LB in the fullness of time.

I can also confirm that I'm 'unlikely', though perhaps not quite so unlikely as ClymAngus.

Cheers,

Drew.

pagroove wrote:

Welcome back also. Now all stay calm and easy But also hope Lb returns so both of you can go on with these great projects

Yes!!!

Screet, who finally found a word for this strange situation

Yes, my return is permanent. And yes, Oolite Extended will rise from the ashes. And - wow - what a reception!

Before the download link to the OE WiP reappears, a few things have to be done, though. (Friendly) debates held, things really solved.

It can't be about the licenses. I actually wrote to the Creative Commons board and they answered that, concerning them, Oolite & oxps would be a legal minefield - my interpretation would hold merit, but the "oxps independent" interpretation would do so, too. That would be a 50:50 situation if tested.

LittleBear, a while back, summed up nicely what is also my opinion:

Sorry. But in my view, YOU CANNOT OWN what you submit to Oolite. We are all ripping off B&B. Anybody can do anything they like with anything I submit to the project. Its not my work, I'm using Giles's code and Giles in turn is using B&B's idea's. Nobody should assert ownership ... The idea of the project is surley that anything we do for Oolite is share and share alike. If people are gonna start getting on their high horses about stuff ... this is not in the spirit of the the project. Anything I submit is on the basis of "free free to rip off steal or post anything you like from my code" (as long as you are doing it to make Oolite a better game and are not making money out of it). I'm sure every other OXP writer writes code on the same basis. If that is not the spirt then I don't want to be involved.

It can't be about blocking each other's efforts. As the basis for that, there will be a thorough explanation of what OE is intended to do, what it's not intended to do, options how to move it forwards (including completely new ideas from someone very clever, like forking Oolite etc. ) without new misunderstandings and without hurting the people involved. And then a debate about practical problems, like keeping it updated. And who is responsible for OE's changes and bugfixing. And what can/should/will be changed in it's original, constituting oxps for OE.

I promise that I will do my best to listen to the concerns of all people involved and if we all get very, very calm, collected, understanding, hugging and lovin' (to cite DH) there will be a solution everybody might be able to live with. And when these concerns have been resolved in a meaningful way, the download link will reappear and work resumed.

For a more cooperative OE effort, I will need help. I can't do it all alone. The workload was already removing my RL. That will also have to be resolved. More cooperation on my side, more help from the other side?

I am very touched by the reception. People wrote to me - people from the boards, even people who never registered on the boards, people I didn't know - and asked me to continue. So here I am. DaddyHoggy was right. I can't leave. Damn

Oh, and one thing is left to do, @LittleBear:
Copyrighted by Griff! Just so anyone knows



Come on: come back. Please. Everyone will be happy about it, including me!

That's that for now *phew*

It's good to be back.

L

Yay! Maybe life can get back to normal now?

I hope we get licensing sorted out once and for all - Sung was a warning shot and after he went away we kind of forgot it was still an issue - O(S)E has shown it still is. No matter what - we need to do this for the long term stability of the project.

It is odd re-reading those old posts - people arguing on different sides of what has turned out to be the same coin...

Might I open the debate on a library please? Or maybe a mirror? Whilst I can understand the interest (after careful review) of oober oxps, I still believe that the way forward is a multiplicity of ways to play.

If we had an oxp library system I would help us in several different ways:

1) Insurance against personal website deletion.
2) Retention of personal oxp right to update.
3) A one stop access point for oober oxp's to pole the modified date on the files stored there so they ALWAYS have the most up to date bug fixed oxps.

It might, sort out a lot of these problems. It's worth a chat anyway.

My problem was never with licences, It was with practicle problems. I have tried to explain this to Lestrade several times, but Lestrade bascally has more faith in people's ability to update things when they should. And in people's ability to read readmes. (Like Readme's that tell you an OXP is a work in progress for example or that Random Hits 1.3.6 BETA might actually be a err Beta!)

The way Random Hits is written means you must delete the old version before installing a new version. The problem is if Lestrade releases the old code for Random Hits in OSE 1.1. I then release 1.3.7 of Random Hits and Lestrade then releases OSE 1.2 with the new code in it then there is no problem as long as ALL users of OSE update.

But if a user does not update OSE from 1.1 to 1.2 and I then release 1.3.8 of Random Hits, the new version of Random Hits will NEVER work properly on that user's machine. This is because random hits writes variables to the player's save file. The variables stay there even if OSE (or Random Hits for that matter) is deleted.

Inevitabley, some users will continue to use an older version of OSE, simpley because they don't get round to updating them. Merely having an old version of OSE installed will breaks any further version of Random Hits I write.

As a Hyperthical: User A downloads OSE 1.x and plays it happily. The next day I release 1.3.7 of Random Hits and the following day Lestrade updates to OSE 1.y. A month later I then release 1.3.8 of Random Hits and Lestrade releases OSE 1.z. Random Hits 1.3.8 will NEVER work on user A's save game, if he continued to play with OSE 1.x installed after I released 1.3.8 of Random Hits.

It is impossible for me to write for an OXP when another OXP contains an old version of my code which has set variables in the save file. Although Lestrade has promised that he will keep OSE up to date, That is not really the problem. The problem is that by C&Ping all of the Random Hits Code into OSE, ALL USERS OF OSE must also be up to date otherwise OSE breaks any furture versions of Random Hits. If I were to write (lets say) 5 further versions of Random Hits to get it to a finished state, it would mean 10 different versions of the Random Hits code are in circulation.

It would be a nightmare trying to bug fix in those circumstances, so I just don't have the time to keep writing for Oolite. I really don't understand why Lestrade felt that this would be a good state of affairs, as it just seems to make everything more complicated that I have to write something and then he has to update another OXP and all users of his OXP have to update so that my OXP to works! Seemed to me it was a lot easier when if you wanted to play an OXP all you had to do was grab the latest version! I really haven't got the time to deal with all that updating.

I'll lurk about and drop by, and if Lestrade wants to distribute Random Hits in OSE then he should feel free to do so. But he'll have to finish it as it is just not practicle to have to multipule realeases of the same OXP code in circulation.

Hi LittleBear,

LittleBear wrote:

I'll lurk about and drop by

Good to read you here again, too! Very that you have returned here, too.

Next step: Now to the practical side of problems. They can be solved. You'll see:

1) There are a counted seven people who have the only OE version to date that has the RH WiP in it. I even know who they are. They are the only ones who might encounter the problem you describe (yet). As any of the older versions of OSE/OE did not yet contain RH!!! <- Important!

2) From the beginning of this thread on (25th May 2009) it had to say this on the tin:

"Please note that this is not yet a published, finished oxp, but a WiP that I publish to find bugs before they are found after a future V1.0! Read all text and instructions here first before downloading and testplaying Oolite Extended! So please keep the WiP nature of OE in mind and that the reason for making the WiP accessible at all is not yet for normal gameplay, but to get this to a V1.0 that works perfectly well."

I know, I know, people don't read readme's (and it happens to me, too). So in the future, people who want OE before it's V1.0 release as finished will have to drop me a PN or email telling me they want to have/test/take a look at it instead of a public download link.

3) Before making a beta-test version of OE (and this was still a beta-test version) accessible again, I'll disable or take out the RH WiP. And it is only going back in if and when you declare it finished (that is, no longer in a WiP state).

4) I will in the future take extra care not to include works in progress into the OE bundle, and rein in my (over-?)enthusiasm to be able to do so.

5) From what you were writing here and in the last email, isn't the problem you describe also going to happen to people who have, say, RH 1.3.6, and then update to RH 1.3.8 without ever using the intermediate 1.3.7?

I understand that if what I was doing had stayed as it was it would have duplicated and doubled this problem - as I said, no more WiPs to be included into OE, even the test version - but is that not a problem that will happen to many people even if they exclusively use the RH WiPs, anyways? Or am I not getting something here?

As said; OE is "but a WiP that I publish to find bugs before they are found after a future V1.0" - and you found a bug in it, a big one. Which was the reason for me publishing it. But I understand that you don't have/want to have the time to bug-fix my idea, too. So the PN/email solution it's going to be instead of a public download link.

Please let's read carefully what the other one wrote and patiently explain if one doesn't get the other at some point - it's a win-win thing, because then both of us can continue our work in a form acceptable to both of us.

Welcome back!

L