Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

General messages about RTC and it's development.

Moderator: George Gilbert

Forum rules
Please read the Forum rules and policies before posting.
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Gambit37 »

NOTE: Split from this topic: Save Game Editing
sixfourfour wrote:Shame that George can't find a way to cleave the open source-able bits from the closed ones.
It's not really a question of can't, but a simple choice not to release it publicly.

The project is entirely his own work, except for a couple of open-source libraries for handling sound and some image processing. It's an issue of ownership. Personal projects are, well, personal and it's entirely reasonable to want to keep it that way.
sixfourfour
Novice
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 7:43 pm

Re: Saved Game Editing

Post by sixfourfour »

Ah, I suppose that depends on which license the "open-source" elements are released under. As if they are bundled with the work, and it was the GPL and not the LGPL, as far as I understand it, for talking sake, then it would legally have to be released. Personally I can't understand the rational behind keeping it closed source in any case given that he gives it away, hence no profit, and he's not working on it. It's like a thing going to dust. Anyway, I'm just saying. I'm sure it's all perfectly well and above board and it's up to him to keep it to himself. And his reasoning is all his own, and none of my business.

I'm just enjoying the game and sorry I can't hack at the code to make it do things that I'd like:D

Peace,
Dunk
http://www.realityinfo.org
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Saved Game Editing

Post by Gambit37 »

I think you might be a bit confused about how the GPL works. Using a pre compiled GPL licensed library to enhance your own private work does not somehow transfer the GPL to the entirety of that new private work.

You seem to be saying that RTC is somehow a derivative work of the libraries it uses, which clearly it isn't. The game code is entirely written by George. The libraries are just supporting functions and all the game code that George wrote is original and belongs to him alone, unless he ever decides to release it. George could easily remove the libraries and write his own code to handle sound if he wanted.

I see this confusion all over the web. People see "GPL" noted on the licence for a small code library that was used on a project and assume that it means the whole project has to be released under the GPL. It doesn't. Hope that clears things up! :)
User avatar
Sophia
Concise and Honest
Posts: 4239
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 9:50 pm
Location: Nowhere in particular
Contact:

Re: Saved Game Editing

Post by Sophia »

This is actually a topic of some controversy within the free software community. The Free Software Foundation liked to assert that merely linking to a piece of GPL software makes the work derivative (because you're using functions from the GPL'd library) and causes the new work to fall under the GPL. The LGPL was designed, if I understand it correctly, specifically for people who wanted to avoid this. This is a very liberal interpretation, of course, and not shared by everyone. I also believe it has not been tested in court. That said, it doesn't really matter, because nothing RTC uses is released under the GPL.

As an aside, RTC is in violation of the licenses of all of the 3rd party libraries that it uses anyway, because they do have clauses in their licenses requiring the software be attributed and its origins not misrepresented, and certain copyright notices be displayed. RTC states merely: "the program itself was entirely written by myself."
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Saved Game Editing

Post by Gambit37 »

Linking makes something a derivative work? That's pretty silly.

I didn't realise GG hadn't acknowledged credit for those libraries, could have sworn that was in his Readme. Naughty boy! ;-)
User avatar
Sophia
Concise and Honest
Posts: 4239
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 9:50 pm
Location: Nowhere in particular
Contact:

Re: Saved Game Editing

Post by Sophia »

sixfourfour
Novice
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 7:43 pm

Re: Saved Game Editing

Post by sixfourfour »

LOL. Three points of view in three paragraphs. So aye, depending on how you read it, GG has to make the code avail to all of us, or stop using the libs that he's using ( assuming they are GPL'd ). Then again, that's "view 3" LOL I'm not arguing for it here, but if he's breaking the "law" as such, then he can think of it. I'd like to see it open source, as I've stated, for my own ends, and that of the greater community: more eyes + more time = better product, one way or the other. I appreciate that GG has got a super base together. I've been playing it all day. I can make my save games avail to the public domain if anyone's interested:)

Peace,
Dunk
http://www.realityinfo.org

PS. What I'm trying to say is that I'm not arguing for the opening for legal reasons, more "pragmatic" ones :) And even then, I'm not overly fussed, just a bit frustrated that I can't hack it:D
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Saved Game Editing

Post by Gambit37 »

I've read more into it and my view is that the linking argument is nonsense in the context of RTC.

Three small libraries don't make the RTC game code a "derivative work" of those libraries. In this context, the applicable point of view is the one labelled on the Wikipedia article as "Point of view: linking is irrelevant".

One can't subscribe to the third "Point of view: any linking violates GPL" in the context of RTC. This POV states "an executable is indeed a derivative work if the executable and GPL code "make function calls to each other and share data structures". Clearly, RTC calls functions from these libraries, but it's one way only and no data structures are shared.

In any case, even if an argument for violation WAS held up in a court, it doesn't matter because the libraries George has used ARE NOT COVERED BY THE GPL. So this whole GPL discussion, in the context of RTC, is rather pointless!

Sophia was a bit wrong about claiming that the libraries require attribution, here's what each lib's licence says:
ZLIB (Compression):
"If you use this software in a product, an acknowledgment in the product documentation would be appreciated but is not required."
LIBPNG (Support for PNG graphics files):
"The Contributing Authors and Group 42, Inc. specifically permit, without fee, and encourage the use of this source code as a component to supporting the PNG file format in commercial products. If you use this source code in a product, acknowledgment is not required but would be appreciated."
FMODEX (Sound functions/format support library):
"FMOD Non-Commercial License: If your product is not intended for commercial gain and does not include the FMOD library for resale, license or other commercial distribution, then use of FMOD is free. Yes that's right, free from license fees!. When using FMOD, a credit line is required in either documentation, or 'on screen' format (if possible). It should contain at least the words 'FMOD Sound System' and 'Firelight Technologies'."
So the only credit/licence requirement that GG is in breach of is the FMODEX one. I suspect that George tried hard to find truly free libraries exactly to avoid the whole licensing issue.

I'd like to see it open source, as I've stated, for my own ends, and that of the greater community
We've had this discussion here before and the fallout messed up our community for a while (search the archives if you like). While I wouldn't want a repeat performance, I think this is an interesting discussion, but please be mindful of sensitivities on both sides. ;)

I agree that it's frustrating, but from a different perspective as a budding dungeon builder: RTC still contains a lot of bugs that make it impossible to use some of the nicer effects. Just check out the RTC bugs forum to see. I don't care about the open source thing, but with George no longer working on the project, it means no bug fixing. I'd at least like him to "lend" the code to a responsible person to take over and bug fix so that the project doesn't stagnate. But what I would like counts for nothing since it's George's decision at the end of the day.

It's also a shame for those of us who put a lot of our own time into helping the project become what it has. Between '00 and '03 I spent most of my spare time playtesting it, finding tons of problems, reporting them and helping improve it. I still do now. I made a key early suggestion on how to improve the engine over the original and Sophia contributed significant ideas (and maybe code?) to the extended engine that came with the later versions. Many of the rest of us have too

I don't think it's unreasonable to say that RTC would not be where it is without our help. I understand that this gives me no rights over how the game is developed and released, but I do feel it's a shame that (a) our significant contributions have not really been recognised and (b) RTC bugs prevent some cool features from being used.

I'm keen to see RTC continue to grow, but I have to accept that it probably won't.
sixfourfour
Novice
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 7:43 pm

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by sixfourfour »

I don't think it's unreasonable to say that RTC would not be where it is without our help. I understand that this gives me no rights over how the game is developed and released, but I do feel it's a shame that (a) our significant contributions have not really been recognised and (b) RTC bugs prevent some cool features from being used.

I'm keen to see RTC continue to grow, but I have to accept that it probably won't.
And to be right honest, after all this effort, why let it go to waste? That's why I said, I'm not speaking "legally" when i say I'd like to see it "open-sourced", but pragmatically. So we can all benefit and GG can be hailed as our hero for ever more :)

Otherwise we'll have to 6 4 4 his ass! :D JOKING

Be sound folks,
Peace,
Dunk
https://www.realityinfo.org
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Gambit37 »

I think the "after all this effort" is exactly the reason why RTC is now stagnant. RTC has been in development for 10 years and George wants a real life. I can't blame him, I do too ;-)

By the way, could you please put your signature into the signature box on your profile? (link at top of page) Embedding it in every post means those of us who turn signatures off still have to see it, and it gets in the way of quick forum scanning. Many thanks.
User avatar
Sophia
Concise and Honest
Posts: 4239
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 9:50 pm
Location: Nowhere in particular
Contact:

Post by Sophia »

Gambit37 wrote:Clearly, RTC calls functions from these libraries, but it's one way only and no data structures are shared.
While I understand the point that you're trying to make, a statement like this is not necessarily true, and more than likely not true for a large project like RTC. Many (most?) libraries often require the use of something called callback functions, where you provide a function that the library will then call, in order to customize the way it does certain tasks. So, it is calling your code in addition to you code calling it. Here's a Wikipedia article that explains it a bit more thoroughly.
Gambit37 wrote:So this whole GPL discussion, in the context of RTC, is rather pointless
Yes, true. I'm not sure why it went on. Can we blame the new guy? :D
Gambit37 wrote:Sophia was a bit wrong...

So the only credit/licence requirement that GG is in breach of is the FMODEX one.
Hmm, I probably got these libraries (all three of which are also used by DSB) confused with Lua (which DSB uses and RTC does not) when thinking of a copyright notice or whatever. In the case of Zlib (and LibPNG, whose license is very similar) I think I was more imprecise than flat-out wrong. I'd still state there's something of a problem: the Zlib license also states "The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not claim that you wrote the original software," and a statement like "was entirely written by myself" all by itself with no clarifications seems to violate the spirit of this.
Gambit37 wrote:Sophia contributed significant ideas (and maybe code?) to the extended engine that came with the later versions.
No, no actual code that I can remember. Plenty of designs and other thoughts that I like to think were helpful or added something, though.
Gambit37 wrote:I think the "after all this effort" is exactly the reason why RTC is now stagnant. RTC has been in development for 10 years and George wants a real life.
Yes, I agree. There is nothing wrong with this at all. I think the thing sixfourfour was lamenting was more that having chosen to move on, he just let it sit rather than passing the torch, so to speak. Though packing it up and moving on requires a certain effort as well, I guess...
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

who knows what GG is planning ;)
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Bit
Arch Master
Posts: 1064
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:53 am
Location: Nuts trees

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Bit »

Todays projects are such time-consuming, that you better care for babies to continue the work one day ;)
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re:

Post by Gambit37 »

Sophia wrote:the Zlib license also states "The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not claim that you wrote the original software," and a statement like "was entirely written by myself" all by itself with no clarifications seems to violate the spirit of this.
Indeed, I hope it's nothing more than an oversight on GGs behalf.
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Gambit37 »

Just returning to the subject of the future of RTC. It still has some serious bugs that prevent us from using some of the nicer features. Here's an example: http://dungeon-master.com/forum/viewtop ... =4&t=27877

George hasn't logged in for 8 months, and hasn't worked on RTC for 2.5 years. I hope that doesn't mean we should assume the project is dead and is not going to be maintained -- that would be a great shame.

I have previously defended George's right to do what he wants the project and I still say it's up to him what happens to it. However, I am going to try one last time to ask "Can we please get the last few bugs cleaned up so that we can use the engine to its full effect?"

How about it George? V0.50 would be a good place to finally wrap up those pesky bugs, after all, saying "v0.49" just seems somehow unsatisfying :-D And if you really have no intention of returning to fix the bugs, would you perhaps consider a limited code release to a trusted individual purely for bug fixing?
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

It would be a real happy day when v0.50 shows up. It's one one those things I wished for this Christmas.
keep your gor coin handy
User avatar
Sophia
Concise and Honest
Posts: 4239
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 9:50 pm
Location: Nowhere in particular
Contact:

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Sophia »

Gambit37 wrote:George hasn't logged in for 8 months, and hasn't worked on RTC for 2.5 years. I hope that doesn't mean we should assume the project is dead and is not going to be maintained
I'm not sure what else would be logical to assume, given the amount of time that it's been. :|
Gambit37 wrote:And if you really have no intention of returning to fix the bugs, would you perhaps consider a limited code release to a trusted individual purely for bug fixing?
Well, not that this will even happen, but even if so, it's also assuming such an individual can even be found. You'd need a skilled C programmer, for one. I think there are a few of those about, but you'd also need to find someone who was willing to adopt the project, learn how RTC works internally, and fix someone else's bugs-- which is kind of a tall order, for anything. Even much larger open source projects with large, open communities they have trouble with that sort of thing.
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Gambit37 »

Re your first reply: GG did say at the beginning of the year he still lurked and would fix stuff, but I guess real life makes that difficult. I just think it's a shame that the project has kind of ended up with whimper rather than a bang.

I'm still working on a couple of custom games off and on but enthusiasm has slowly ebbed away on them because some of the things I want to do just aren't possible with the current bugs. :( I guess I either switch engines (not sure there is one that does what I want), remove the good stuff from the custom games, or just abandon them entirely. All pretty annoying options. :-(
User avatar
Bit
Arch Master
Posts: 1064
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:53 am
Location: Nuts trees

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Bit »

Don't give that up Gambit. Sooner or later the tools will be available. I'm pretty sure that the power of LUA would make it possible with DSB already - but it probably needs a lot of time to be able to realize it that way. The big question is, how to make that handy - and tasty to work with...

@Sophia:
i.e. the renderer Povray. That one is full of modules, where some aren't hosted anymore. And they write about: don't ask us - we have absolutely no idea how those work. Even I got the one or other information out of CSBwin, it would take me the years that Paul spent on it to understand it completely. And RTC with all its abstractions is surely even harder.
Or - see how long it takes even to pass over the menu screen in DM2. Even that Kentaro passed this all one time, and he's pretty skilled in assembler - the side effects of the runtime-stuff seems to give him headaches too. And I just try to go forward and hope that I stumble into some light-switch... :D
User avatar
Sphenx
On Master
Posts: 566
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 11:23 am
Contact:

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Sphenx »

Gambit37 wrote:George hasn't logged in for 8 months, and hasn't worked on RTC for 2.5 years. I hope that doesn't mean we should assume the project is dead and is not going to be maintained -- that would be a great shame.
What about me then? :P ... He certainly did not abandon the project but has no time to deal with.

Bit wrote:And RTC with all its abstractions is surely even harder
? Do you want to say it would be harder to understand RTC code than CSBWin code (based on disassembled code)?
I don't think so.

As RTC is George's personal project, he would not give away the source like this, even more knowing there are still bugs he would need to fix, or even new features to implement.
Now, I am sure some of us would be able to handle with RTC source code if George were to release it (but probably better to just send it to the potential coders and not make it public for everyone).
It is up to George to make the move.

On the other side, having the RTC editor and a txt file for produced custom dungeon is already some great information to make some compatibility towards an engine that is very promising, say .. DSB.
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Gambit37 »

Sphenx wrote:As RTC is George's personal project, he would not give away the source like this, even more knowing there are still bugs he would need to fix, or even new features to implement.
I'm not asking GG to give away his code. I'm asking for the bugs to be fixed, or for the code to be curated by a trusted other individual for bug fixing purposes (and not given away!) I know it's a tall order, it was merely a suggestion about how to handle the future of RTC, which is what this thread is about.

RTC is a great engine and very powerful. It has some great features. But some of those features are currently pretty useless with the outstanding bugs. I don't think it's much to ask for (a) the bugs to be fixed and (b) someone else to fix them if GG can't or won't.

Personally, I just don't understand why anyone would be happy to have a known buggy piece of software as the final version of a project. That makes no sense to me. *shrug*
User avatar
Sophia
Concise and Honest
Posts: 4239
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 9:50 pm
Location: Nowhere in particular
Contact:

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Sophia »

Gambit37 wrote:Personally, I just don't understand why anyone would be happy to have a known buggy piece of software as the final version of a project. That makes no sense to me. *shrug*
I don't think being happy with it is really the right way of putting it. I think it's more that this is the state of where the project was when real life intervened. It's not a desired end state, simply, as the saying goes, "it is what it is."

It would require a certain time investment to fix the bugs. If George can't and/or won't-- and it's looking that way-- then, yes, someone else could. But! It would also require a certain time investment to seek out someone else willing and able to take on the project, get that person up to speed on how RTC works, package up and send over all of the materials, and so on. Doing all that in itself would also be a time investment that someone who is extremely busy with other things cannot make. Moving on and passing things on would also require relinquishing a certain sense of personal attachment, which can be difficult.
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Gambit37 »

All good points which I'm aware of and do understand. Especially the personal attachment thing. Oh well, worth a try! ;-)
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Gambit37 »

I did some more work on Maze of Zagor recently and several bugs are causing big problems. Monster AI issues, immobile monsters behind pits and weird bugs with throwing items are also causing massive headaches. And a lot of more minor bugs are really annoying (sound not stopping when you die for example).

I'm increasingly worried that RTC is not stable enough to release the game I'm making. I really hope all my work isn't wasted. I'm seriously considering switching to DSB (!!!).
User avatar
plenty
Novice
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 8:59 pm

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by plenty »

George Gilbert wrote:I'm still here - lurking away :D

Real life keeps getting in the way, but I still have every intention to return! As Gambit says above, there's a candidate V0.50 which fixes several of the bugs that have been reported; it's just a question of finding time to polish it up a bit more and fix some of the more recent critical issues found and it's good to go. With a couple of young kids around however, finding time these days is easier said than done...
I've been visiting this forum once in a blue moon, hoping for GG' great comeback.
It looks like he has faded away anyway... and so did RTC :(
User avatar
Gambit37
Should eat more pies
Posts: 13714
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 1:57 pm
Location: Location, Location
Contact:

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Gambit37 »

Yep, sure looks that way. As do my projects! I've no time these days to convert RTC projects to DSB which was my plan :-(
Clark Kent
Neophyte
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 11:12 am

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Clark Kent »

It would be nice to see at least V0.50 with the bugfixes.

But I know how real life can keep getting in the way...
User avatar
Lord_BoNes
Jack of all trades
Posts: 1064
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:36 pm
Location: Ararat, Australia.

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Lord_BoNes »

I doesn't look like we're gonna be getting v0.50 anytime soon.
But, George might give all a scare, and show up randomly. He apparently lurks around these parts from time to time, so who knows?
 
Image

1 death is a tragedy,
10,000,000 deaths is a statistic.
- Joseph Stalin

Check out my Return to Chaos dungeon launcher
And my Dungeon Master Clone
User avatar
Crash.
Adept
Posts: 228
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:15 am

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Crash. »

Maybe donations would help? I would Paypal $50 to GG to encourage a source code release with information about the RTC data. It has taken me many hours to try and figure out things like the item list, and I would gladly pay to save time. Of course, bug fixes to RTC would be fantastic, since the graphic work I'm doing won't be of much use if people decide RTC isn't worth using. Most of all, Return To Chaos represents a significant achievement, which I hope will not disappear.
User avatar
Chaos-Shaman
High Lord
Posts: 2642
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: The Gates of Hell

Re: Releasing RTC source code / future of RTC.

Post by Chaos-Shaman »

maybe perhaps just plain old good will, or it might be more respect, could be less criticism and more optimism, or acknowledgement of achievment, possibly all of us at once who wants it would say, we're here ready and waiting would work. RTC is a project of love, not money. time spent was on the pleasures of creating it. this is why i really do believe it is not quite dead yet, but the more we sound off that it is finished, the more less likely GG would want to finish the awesome mega project that from what i have learned, took 10 years of his leisure time, of which he does not want to just give away such achievement. one can only speculate the future with a positive spin, not negative. i take it that it's hard to convince such a person that way, unless it's a sport, for he is not playing it.
i wish GG to come back. there is more fun to be had with RTC. and out pops GG , an infinipossiohiptrypclitism wish
keep your gor coin handy
Locked