MistaED wrote:
Shd, the issue is that you can't dynamic link on a lot of gaming platforms (iPhone, PS3, Xbox360, etc.) so the dynamic vs static issue is quite big and this is where the GPL (and LGPL) falls short unfortunately.
That might be a problem indeed, I didn't developed under other platforms so thanks for clarification.
DarkAngel wrote:
That's a problem with the GPL - making themselves incompatible with the rest of the world...
Not really, they tried very hard to be compatible with EPL while making [L]GPLv3. Eclipse rejected their effort though. Exceptions makes this license very flexible. Maybe exceptions might be even capable in making compatibility with mentioned other gaming platforms, I don't remember.
Quote:
Fixes/improvements to the Horde core have to be contributed back to the project IIRC -- private additions have to be done through the provided interface.
I assumed you understand that I've been talking about BSD-like licenses. EPL is almost sufficient license (for me).[/quote]
The thing is: someone is developing code (by himself), patent it and insert into Horde3D tree. Because You can't track each new patent, code is accepted and being used by 'their competition'. After 'competitor' publish their product, they suing him by violating patent. The other less aggresive scenario might be to put new patents on most their code. Then, announce
charges for using their part after it will be integral part of Horde3D.
I'm not accusing anyone for being such an ass, but we shouldn't let this possibility exist even in theory, should we?
Quote:
No serious games companies will support a GPL engine -- keeping the source code of their game private is very important (at least for the first few months/years to ensure sales). The EPL makes a compromise where they have to publish their source for Horde3D, but they can keep the source of the rest of their game private.
Without this compromise, it is very unlikely that Horde will ever appear in a commercial game project.
[...]
It's a really, really good thing if a big company uses horde for their own products (and makes money off our work)... Why? Because they have talented professional programmers on their pay-roll -- programmers who will be paid to work with Horde3D, and who will be forced to release their improvements back to us for free!
I know that their business model is based on source being closed. It's very big waste of human resources though, but we both agree with that, so I won't dive into. You say that they will contribute to horde3d anyway, and make their other components private which satisfies You. It's still waste of energy, but I agree - it's not bad situation. As You said they have talented programmers and their contributions will aid Horde3D community a lot.
There is other scenario that I'm scared to. They wont work on horde3d at all, maybe fix few bugs, and make external wrappers for private engine-related functionality. It doesn't make me feel good because in the same time good GPL'ed software would persuaded them it's worth making their work public too, help other Horde3D authors and having really good product in the same time. They don't have to sell licenses on program itself. Everything is all about business model that won't support this horrible reinventing the wheel. I'd like to tell You concrete ideas which are suited to game-develop but it would ruin my chances (without all this big money). Altough they can make their own, by choosing EPL over GPL You're contributing to sustained reinventing the wheel model. Even if You think I'm wrong, the thing hurts me most is
by choosing EPL over LGPL You're not giving any chance to prove that complete code openness might be way to make good money (we agree about better product, dont we?) too.