dun geddit, isnt linux supposed = open source = less copyrights n stuff involved

Thats what linux ppl always tell. For me as a software developer, the GPL (usual licence for linux software and libraries) is just bad. It looks like you can use it in your projects, but in fact you are not allowed to --- UNLESS you make your own project open source as well.

That is not an option for commercial software like UT3 of course.

:D
isn't the world unfair ; (.

:)

that's exactly the point of GPL. there are other licenses if this particular one doesn't suit you.

UNLESS you make your own project open source as well.

o0 thats _the_ idea behind os ?!

Many people are happy with MIT/BSD style licences where the code is truely free for use in any way you choose, which would be fine to include in a closed source app.

Not all open-source coders want to force everyone else to be an open source coder.

I see it as like religious nuts who want to convert everyone else to their faith because they must be right, vs people who just practice their faith and let everyone else make their own informed decisions.

"I see it as like religious nuts who want to convert everyone else to their faith because they must be right, vs people who just practice their faith and let everyone else make their own informed decisions."

well there is a fundamental difference imho. you offer something and dont force anyone to take it.
and in case someone wants to use it, its good to be sure that he is going to help everyone else with it, too...
if someone wants to make money, he has to invest something.

Well, could Epic force ppl on Linux to buy a Windows copy to get all the game data and online ready cdkey and then supply a free open source linux loader? Would this solution violate the gpl rules? Not sure if that is possible from the programming point of view tho.

Isn't that how all game releases work?

What imbaczek said. That's not a GOOD thing? Screw you, you selfish person. That's the POINT of the GPL -- more freedom. No one's forcing you to use it.

No, you can't use other people's GPL code in your closed source application, precisely because that's what they didn't want bad people like you to do.

Use BSD or MIT or Apache if you don't like it.

Its not a good thing if you want the linux platform to expand into the gamer userbase, because you're never going to convince the games manufacturers to give away their trade secrets to their competitors.

If more linux software was BSD / MIT licence instead of GPL this would be less of an issue. Me, I dont care about linux, it can have 0 linux games for all I care. I assume you want UT3 tho?

My personal opinion is mostly neutral. I don't take sides in arguments, for the most part, but I try to make people see the flaws in their thinking. His has many. For some reason, it's just assumed that anything he doesn't like and doesn't fit his selfish interests is the most terrible thing in the world.

On a communism vs capitalism debate, I'd probably go with capitalism, because I'm libertarian minded; so I don't see anything inherently wrong with BSD or MIT, but I can perfectly understand the reasoning behind GPL, and to just attack it because it doesn't jive with your sense of self-importance is absurd.

And to expound on my original post, I might add that you CAN use GPL code in a "closed-source application" to an extent, but you have to make the source available if requested.

Close, but not quite. If you include any GPLed components in your product, you have to release any changes you make to that source. You do *NOT* have to release the entire source to your product or license it under the GPL (at least, that was the case with v2)

Yes, you don't get it.

This didn't sound very good. Hope he work it out.


btw. where's danseko? He should be here any minute!!1!1!1ettoneuno

q:D

no lunix?!? I BLAM TEH QBOYS!!11

..like that? O_O

Legal? Seriously? Have you had legal involved in previous games?
icculus: Not like this, no. There's some issues with middleware

Thats surprising really - to work with open source software you need to be practically a lawyer, at least if you're doing things "right".

any idea what he was on about? "middleware"

By Middleware he will mean some library which they've used to help port it by wrapping up the OS specific pieces of code. For example they might have used SDL which simplifies and standardises things like input, in a similar way to Direct X does on Windows.

It shouldnt be SDL causing the problem though, as thats LGPL, and so can be linked with a closed-source application, but I guess they used some other library that was released as simply GPL, which would then require them to release the full source to UT3 if they release a binary.

ah right

\o/

Wouldn't havok or even the gamespy browser be considered middleware?

These bits would definitely fall into the "third party licensed code with closed source".

maybe if you would like to use code - that was written mostly unpaid - and use it in your closed source software that will earn you $$$
but so be it

and why do you ahve to be a lawyer? isn't contacting one about the same? shouldn't everyone do this who's about to do business? it's just negligent not to do so

No, even if you're releasing your work for free you need to read and understand the licences that all libraries you use are licenced under, and you may hit upon issues.

There are many different open source licences, and they're not all compatible with each other. For example, the licence that OpenSSL uses is not compatible with GPL due to the requirement to credit its use. So if you want to use the two together, you're kinda screwed. Either that, or you ignore the licences and hope you dont get sued (ie, not the "right" way).

As for why you should be a lawyer, well that was my point - if they havent really had a legal dept involved before, they should have been checking the licences themselves - and if you try reading one of the licences to understand the content, it'll make you want to employ a lawyer. :)

Your typical lawyer who deals with business contracts is unlikely to be an IP or copyright lawyer. The company I work for has whole departments of lawyers dedicated to just these topics :|

i imagine 3m to be a touch bigger than epic ;)

If you want to use their software, you should play by their rules (whether these are valid have courts to decide). You are not forced to use any library.

Do not complain just because there are licences trying to stop people from stealing other people's work.

What you say about open-source licenses (using the very vague term "open-source") can be said about licenses in general and about software patents even more so.

Furthermore, comparing FOSS advocates to religious fanatics is close to an ad hominem attack.

If you want to use their software, you should play by their rules (whether these are valid have courts to decide).

Hence the comments in this branch re having to read all the licences carefully.

Furthermore, comparing FOSS advocates to religious fanatics is close to an ad hominem attack.

Well it *is* a religious thing to many (I'm guessing you? ;)). Yes, that was flamebait, but if you want to reply to that, then reply to that post rather than derailing this one, which was agreeing with you, that you must read, understand, and obey the licences, even if you're writing non-commercial OSS.

It is a religion and it's called Yoism.

A) not everything that you read on Wikipedia is true and
B) OS isn't a religion unless you make it one for yourself, like all other ideologies

now i'm really curious what the specific problem is.

I guess it deals with rights ^^

^^

same actually

OH SNAP

i don't get it. who is icculus and why is he specifically porting ut3 to linux?

i don't get it either, i also don't get what he's talking about xD

icculus has ported tons of games to linux. http://icculus.org/projects/

Haha, this guy made a port for jumpnbump for windows!
sweeet
: DDDDDD

Not all of those projects are ported by him, they're just hosted there.

ya true. forgot to mention that part

yeah ok i kinda thought so. why isn't epic doing a linux version by themselves? are they kidding us? most servers run on linux they _need_ to do a linux port in some way atleast for servers.

i have no idea. afaik epic did all their other ut ports didnt they? the people who work on ports at icculus are pretty good though so i wouldnt worry too much

Ryan Gordon _is_ contracted by Epic for Mac/Linux ports :)

Previous ut's had both directx, opengl and software renders. UT3 only have directx render afaik, which is most likely the reason.

Hmm.. based on the way he's phrasing himself, it could be this isn't about GPL, but about the rights to use DirectX 10-specific effects under Linux, or something else Windows-related.

Dunno, just sounds strange that he'd have to keep secret about an issue that only affects the GPL or Epic.

In any case I can tell you this, once I get that linux version, my dual booting days are over. :D

What is linux again ?

what is quake3?
ut3 is awesome!!

now the thread is complete

q3>q4

now the universe is complete

now i'm borred

so am I :(

CPMA > OSP, just for good measure

nice twist

Then plus me

do you think I'm some cheap [+]-slut? :(

There is something important that needs to be clarified in here.

There is certainly nothing blocking any gaming developement company to release a game on Linux EXCEPT if you decide to build you engine using proprietary middleware.

I'll point you to this article here where John Carmack talks about idTech5 and mention that

We still make those decisions even today when we’re doing the Rage code when we have decisions about “do we want to integrate some other vendor’s solution, some proprietary code into this”. And the answer’s usually no, because eventually id Tech 5 is going to be open source also. This is still the law of the land at id, that the policy is that we’re not going to integrate stuff that’s going to make it impossible for us to do an eventual open source release.

So basically, strategic decisions at the very start of the developement process for the UT3 engine is the very reason why there is a delay with the Linux client. This is also the reason why Linux gaming "sux" (idsoftware games aside).

- spec

Epic aren't giving away the source code for the client so this isn't really relevant. You don't need to open source your program to make it available on Linux, you just have to avoid using any GPL licensed code in your program, which can be a pain if there's no good alternative.

This thread is silly. Of course you can make closed-source games for Linux. Of course you can interface with the OpenGL API graphics layer. Icculus stated what he did because the problem is something ridiculous. What was once a game series devoted to their Linux version has turned away from it in several ways, and with the exclusivity agreements companies now days make with each other I wouldn't be at all surprised if it had to do with Microsoft marketing Vista but who knows, all I know is how can their support *decrease* from UT2004 when desktop Linux has increased a whole lot since then? Wake me up when companies show some real effort in making games for my platform.

F*&k you Epic, I will never buy another Epic or Midway branded game again. Congrats on losing another once-loyal customer!

I bought the UT3 for Windows, trusting that there would be a Linux installer as announced. I upgraded my freaking hardware so I could actually play it nicely when there installer got released. Now it's been four months and still not a word.

I agree with the Canadian Anonymous - f*&k you Epic.

go id

where?

I thought the GPL allowed using all libraries in any program, but if you wanted to make any improvements to *those libraries* then you need to release those improvements. This shouldn't pose any problem at all. It allows you to use any libraries while you can keep the other components of your game closed. If I'm correct in this assumption then I don't see the problem.

Probably just MS exclusivity crap.

BTW, interesting note. If you go to FileShack and look at the number of downloads for the ETQW demo, the Linux demo has been downloads take up 23% of the total downloads. If that's any indication of the number of Linux gamers out there, that's quite a lot. So, too bad for them (and us) that UT3 for Linux isn't out.

vi > emacs

Now it is complete.

yeh f-u epic , takin my money and not releasing - too late now anyway!

Yeah, there are plenty of people using Linux and many of them would love to see more Linux games. I for one do not support game companies that don provide a Linux version. As far as I aware you can use open source code to your hearts content as long as if someone requests the source code you provide it to them. This doesn´t mean that if you write your own software you have to give out the source code, it just means you have to give credit where credit is due.

ID Software has released their games with Linux versions and it´s been very successful, it game them a very positive image in the community, you don get the source code you still need the original game. Just installs easily on Linux. Many other games are also available for Linux and I´ll just have to stick with them for now.

MS has made their biggest mistake releasing Vista and now more and more are switching over to Linux and MacOS. Although MS´s next operating system will be very similar in design to Linux as they´re moving over to a modular OS design. I think it´ll be too late for them, I think they are going to be 12 years behind Linux and MacOS when they finally get this right.

for me the linux versions of most games give far better fps
ut2k4 did
doom3 did
ut99
you name it

the reason......
open source developers do it for love not for a check
they cant help it it must work "right" not just pass QC
they actually use the stuff they are working on

something else..... if microsoft did like id
guess who wouldnt be using xp, vista ....
after all the viral deployment was done windows would probably act right....omg they would know how to get into my pc!!!
yea. how about
wow my windows does that?
lol ms rules the lazy world.

P.S. I must admit,my 62 bit vista has been doing quite well.
and yea a lot of us shelled out quite a bit to play this game.

We fired the linux server up and it looked good until...

Until we started to get load on the server and for our small bunch of regulars, that's 6 - 8 people playing dm

We noticed a big drop in fps to the point where once we had 8 people on, they started leaving

What a shame, there were 4 people on whom we had never seen before giving the game a whirl and they encountered crap performance on the linux server

We will be requesting the server admin to re-install the windows version, at least that kept the same playability and scaled much better than the linux server version did

Yes, I know, it could be ram, network, disks etc all hitting a wall but even so, who has time to figure out the root cause these days, you just want something that works properly out of the box and will he community coming back

What a contrast to ut2004 - we all expected the same betterment in performance over windows but in fact the opposite is true