Would the team object to a mini feature added to ScummVM?

General chat related to ScummVM, adventure gaming, and so on.

Moderator: ScummVM Team

User avatar
ScummVM Developer
Posts: 2261
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:31 pm
Location: Athens, Greece

Post by md5 »

After re-reading the posts of Reckless, he is saying that only a resource will be added to the executable, and that the source code itself won't be modified. Plus, the InnoSetup script needs to be changed.

If only those parts need to be changed and there's source code provided for all the things that will be changed and tools which will be used, then it would be great :) My original objection was the lack of source code and references, which I poited out.

Any help and patches are welcome and should be submitted to our tracker. If your patch is well documented and explained, I don't see any reason it can't be added. And I wish it can be added, I'm using Vista too :P

User avatar
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 5:17 pm

Post by Herrscher »

md5 wrote:Asking for the source code of something is not annoying ridiculous, it's how GPL works.
Asking for sourcecode like

Code: Select all

if( RunningOnVista )
    RegisterAtGameExplorer( symbol, XMLfile );
IS ridiculous, with or without GPL. At least in this context here.

md5 wrote:I pointed him to the right direction, i.e. I told him to use the bugtracker and provide source code for what he did, I honestly don't understand why this is considered to be a "dogmatic answer".
Because the harsh blocking way you said it.

Of course, submitting the relevant changes via patch tracker would be the next logical step.
But he just asked _if there is any interest for that feature at all here_ before he invests quite some time for nothing.

A simple "No, the team members hate Vista!!11 Don't do it!11" or a "Yes, small but nice. Go for it and submit the relevant changes to the patch tracker whenever it is ready and stable. We will then see how we can integrate it to the Windows build system." would both be "good" answers for that.

But blaming him for not providing source to a shitty script at first is not the right way to recruit some future maybe-patch-submitter.

md5 wrote:Plus, Herrscher, the last part of your post contradicts itself:

....yet you clearly seem to offend here :? . Adding that "No offence intended" does not help...

I'm no native english speaker. I just feel there's a difference between saying things I feel about st. clearly versus offending randomly.

But since you're from Greece, maybe you're the one who doesn't understand "offence" correctly?!?! :?:

I don't know. 8)

User avatar
ScummVM Developer
Posts: 2261
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:31 pm
Location: Athens, Greece

Post by md5 »

Herrscher, since you don't seem to get it, you offended me not once, but twice, first by talking about me being a part of the team like this, and then talking about my nationality. I suggest you stop making witty comments about people you don't know, and about things you shouldn't be criticizing, like my country. If you bothered to look at MSDN, it's a bit more than 2 lines, and since the whole project is open source, we can't accept closed source binaries, whether you like it or not.

Since this is turning out to be a flame war, here's the final answer:

Reckless, if you wish to add this as a feature, feel free to use our tracker. Please include any sources for the tools you're using and references to how you did it.

Please, refrain from posting any more flame posts, it's really not helpful

User avatar
ScummVM Lead
Posts: 2043
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 1:06 pm

Post by sev »

Boys, please, calm down.

That is completely OK that this interesting feature was submitted as a proposal to our forums before work on a clean solution was even started.

As of OS-specific setup, we already have similar things. Just take a look into our dists/ directory. It has several OS-specific menu items, icons, etc.

GPL does not imply that source code HAS to be published same date as binary executable, but binds author of the modification to provide such sources by any request. So no violation took place here.

As of deciding either some feature is accepted or not, relevant responsible team members will discuss it and give their decision once asked. Usually this could be achieved by submitting a feature request. Again, it could be possible to ask about it right here on forums, though the answer is not guaranteed in such case :).

So, Reckless, this looks quite interesting. I suggest you to submit a FR, and mention that you are willing to implement this feature once there are no direct objections. And thank you for your efforts to improve ScummVM usability.


User avatar
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 1:06 am
Location: Dallas, TX

Post by exofreeze »

power trip - somebody gets "team member" added to their name and they take over the joint.

Posts: 217
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:12 am

Post by Reckless »

Is it safe to come out now :)

I'll add the feature to the tracker and will hopefully be clearer in its definition.

User avatar
ScummVM Developer
Posts: 2261
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:31 pm
Location: Athens, Greece

Post by md5 »

For what it's worth, my behavior here was not right, this won't happen again. I'm having personal problems and I overreacted where I shoudn't have

User avatar
ScummVM Porter
Posts: 1150
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:27 am
Location: a dying planet

Post by Raziel »




Post Reply