It is currently Fri Nov 16, 2018 6:15 am

All times are UTC




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 3:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 2:47 am
Posts: 35
Well, I'm not sure how feasible it is... but, when replaying my Myst V game, I noticed one of the credits referenced the ODE, the open Dynamics Engine, a physics engine, which is under the LGPL.

Now, the way I see it, we can kill two birds with one stone: if we ask Cyan to consider working on releasing their information regarding the ODE implementation in Plasma (NOT, mind you, releasing Myst V or even more of their engine. Just the libraries and calls to ODE), we might have more feasibility, legally speaking.

In addition, by getting off of PhysX, we would be able to take a far more open approach (If we get some REALLY good devs to work on the ODE library, we might be able to rival the Havok engine in performance!) and modify a greater portion of the code... without having to use a different physics engine.

But, I'm no programmer, so I'm not sure to what extent the ODE is released. Surely more than PhysX, though.

Perhaps this would also increase our own ability to implement cross-platform support, as well as add in a 64-bit client for those running the advanced OSes.

Then again... I saw the latest PhysX have a Linux client... hmm... who knows. Just a rambling thought.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 4:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 10:55 pm
Posts: 625
ODE from Myst 5 won't cut it for Uru physics, not by a long shot.

I've had good luck with Bullet in PlasmaClient, and I do have plans to port CWE to use Bullet... it's one of many things on my list.

_________________
MOULagain KI #: 66990

When I was your age, we rocket-jumped up hill both ways in boiling lava.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 6:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 3:12 pm
Posts: 2190
Location: Houston
Wow put my foot in it a little bit the early version of GPLv3 I saw a while back wasn't nearly as nasty as the finished product.

Wonder why in creation Cyan picked it. :(

_________________
Waymet


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 3:12 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 4:33 pm
Posts: 878
Location: Jurupa Valley, CA USA
MustardJeep wrote:
Wonder why in creation Cyan picked it. :(

I was going to assume it's due to the server provisions of the Affero clause, but it seems they chose not to use that particular version.

_________________
MOULa KI #32712
MOULa KI #23298
MOUL KI #35129
D'mala KI #74265
Gehn KI #10113


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 6:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 10:55 pm
Posts: 625
MustardJeep wrote:
Wow put my foot in it a little bit the early version of GPLv3 I saw a while back wasn't nearly as nasty as the finished product.

Wonder why in creation Cyan picked it. :(


I assume they picked it becasue it means they'll be the only company that can offer closed-source licenses - a more distributor-friendly OSI license would allow someone else to create a closed product from the code.

The GPL is fine for this, but they need to add the correct linking exceptions.

_________________
MOULagain KI #: 66990

When I was your age, we rocket-jumped up hill both ways in boiling lava.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2011 7:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 5:04 pm
Posts: 115
Location: England
PaladinOfKaos wrote:
The GPL is fine for this, but they need to add the correct linking exceptions.

A linking exception is enough to allow distribution of binaries made from the existing code, but still leaves a couple of problems:

1. It needs to be made clear that any contributions are made under GPLv3-with-exceptions, not just GPLv3 (or compatible, e.g. GPLv2-or-later). Ideally, before someone is granted commit access, they should provide an explicit licence statement regarding their contributions.

2. We can't use any GPL libraries without first getting exceptions from their authors. And unless the library is developed by a relatively small team of people (or it requires GNU-style copyright assignment), getting such an exception is unlikely.

In the longer term, replacing PhysX with Bullet would eliminate a significant issue. The OpenSSL issue could potentially be worked around by delegating connection management to a plug-in (e.g. invoking ssh or s_client to create the connection).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2011 5:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 10:55 pm
Posts: 625
While those are overall ecosystem issues and they do (somewhat) limit the directions the code can go by limiting which libraries we can use, I'm mostly just concerned with making sure distributing client builds is 100% legal.

I am in favor of replacing non-GPL components when possible... but it's not a particularly high priority, as long as they don't interfere with distributing client builds.

_________________
MOULagain KI #: 66990

When I was your age, we rocket-jumped up hill both ways in boiling lava.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2011 12:21 am 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:29 am
Posts: 520
PaladinOfKaos wrote:
While those are overall ecosystem issues and they do (somewhat) limit the directions the code can go by limiting which libraries we can use, I'm mostly just concerned with making sure distributing client builds is 100% legal.

I am in favor of replacing non-GPL components when possible... but it's not a particularly high priority, as long as they don't interfere with distributing client builds.


Couldn't we simply, create an install package for the client itself that would copy the required libraries from the physx directory into the Uru directory. So in short, when installing you install the PhysX SDK. Then the you open the install package that we distribute and it simply installs the Uru components onto your system in the appropriate places, and copies the PhysX and any other GPL issue libraries from the previous SDK download into the new Uru directory?

_________________
MOULAgain KI: 024104

Chloe Rhodes

DIRT - Uru Live


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 2:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 5:04 pm
Posts: 115
Location: England
ChloeRhodes wrote:
Couldn't we simply, create an install package for the client itself that would copy the required libraries from the physx directory into the Uru directory. So in short, when installing you install the PhysX SDK. Then the you open the install package that we distribute and it simply installs the Uru components onto your system in the appropriate places, and copies the PhysX and any other GPL issue libraries from the previous SDK download into the new Uru directory?

I don't think that this is sufficient. Even if we don't include the PhysX or OpenSSL DLLs in any binary distribution, the executable itself still has to be built using those libraries' header files.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 11:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 1:41 am
Posts: 216
Newton Game Dynamics is under the ZLib License which is compatible with the GPL license.

Newton went Open Source earlier this year. Newton unlike some Physics Engines has been designed to be as accurate/stable as possible(So you don't have ragdolls flying away magically like you do in Half-Life 2 when you put a ragdoll in a doorway and close the door) but at the same time fast(It has 2 solvers, one thats very accurate but slower and one designed for real-time usage such as games).

_________________
Image
-Stu


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 2:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 10:55 pm
Posts: 625
if Newton is GPL-compatible now, I may make the effort to look into it. I'd basically decided to use Bullet already, since I had good luck with it in PlasmaClient. I made the initial decision to use bullet for PC before Newton was open-source, though.

_________________
MOULagain KI #: 66990

When I was your age, we rocket-jumped up hill both ways in boiling lava.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 2:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 1:41 am
Posts: 216
PaladinOfKaos wrote:
if Newton is GPL-compatible now

According to the GNU website the ZLib License (Which Newton uses) is compatible with the GPL License. There is nothing which states its incompatible with GPLv3 (According to the GNU website if they don't state that a particular license is incompatible with a version of GPL then all versions should be compatible).

_________________
Image
-Stu


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2011 5:51 pm 
Offline
Former MystOnline Moderator

Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:05 pm
Posts: 4181
Location: 56°2'26", -3°20'28"
The illustration in the GPL Quick Guide expresslly shows zlib as compatible with both GPLv2 and GPLv3: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html

_________________
Image Mac - MOULagain KI#00004826 00004289
In the interests of the environment, this post has been constructed entirely from recycled electrons.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron